ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2023
In vivo quantitative MRI: T
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- MRpro: Open Framework for Model-Based, Learned, and Quantitative MR Imaging-Application to Low-Field MRI.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
- MultidimensionalbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Imaging cell phone radiation in tissue mimics with hyperpolarized low-field MRI.Science advances · 2026Article
- Magnetization transfer imaging using non-balanced SSFP at ultra-low field.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Rapid quantitative MRI at 46 mT: Accelerated TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Repeatability and reproducibility of rapid TImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Ultra-low-field brain MRI morphometry: Test-retest reliability and correspondence to high-field MRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Toward Next-Generation Molecular Imaging with a Clinical Low-Field (0.064 T) Point-of-Care MRI Scanner.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo measure healthy brain [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] relaxation times at 0.064 T. MATERIALS AND
methods[Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] relaxation times were measured in vivo for 10 healthy volunteers using a 0.064 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system and for 10 test samples on both the MRI and a separate 0.064 T nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) system. In vivo [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] values are reported for white matter (WM), gray matter (GM), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for automatic segmentation regions and manual regions of interest (ROIs).
results[Formula: see text] sample measurements on the MRI system were within 10% of the NMR measurement for 9 samples, and one sample was within 11%. Eight [Formula: see text] sample MRI measurements were within 25% of the NMR measurement, and the two longest [Formula: see text] samples had more than 25% variation. Automatic segmentations generally resulted in larger [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] estimates than manual ROIs. DISCUSSION: [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] times for brain tissue were measured at 0.064 T. Test samples demonstrated accuracy in WM and GM ranges of values but underestimated long [Formula: see text] in the CSF range. This work contributes to measuring quantitative MRI properties of the human body at a range of field strengths.
Indexed as
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.