ArticleScientific reports2023
T2* quantification using multi-echo gradient echo sequences: a comparative study of different readout gradients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generating R2Medical physics · 2026Article
- Development of an echo-shifted, multi-echo, gradient-echo sequence for TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Optimizing T2* imaging for adolescent and young adult patients at 7 T.Pediatric radiology · 2025Article
- Synthetic data in generalizable, learning-based neuroimaging.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Optimization and validation of multi-echo, multi-contrast SAGE acquisition in fMRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Optimization of Gradient-Echo Echo-Planar Imaging for TSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To quantify T2*, multiple echoes are typically acquired with a multi-echo gradient echo sequence using either monopolar or bipolar readout gradients. The use of bipolar readout gradients achieves a shorter echo spacing time, enabling the acquisition of a larger number of echoes in the same scan time. However, despite their relative time efficiency and the potential for more accurate quantification, a comparative investigation of these readout gradients has not yet been addressed. This work aims to compare the performance of monopolar and bipolar readout gradients for T2* quantification. The differences in readout gradients were theoretically investigated with a Cramér-Rao lower bound and validated with computer simulations with respect to the various imaging parameters (e.g., flip angle, TR, TE, TE range, and BW). The readout gradients were then compared at 3 T using phantom and in vivo experiments. The bipolar readout gradients provided higher precision than monopolar readout gradients in both computer simulations and experimental results. The difference between the two readout gradients increased for a lower SNR and smaller TE range, consistent with the prediction made using Cramér-Rao lower bound. The use of bipolar readout gradients is advantageous for regions or situations where a lower SNR is expected or a shorter acquisition time is required.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.