ArticleJournal of medicine and life2023
Optimizing imaging resolution in brain MRI: understanding the impact of technical factors.
Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Appropriate incorporation of susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging into routine imaging protocols for accurate diagnosis of traumatic brain injuries: a systematic review.Journal of medicine and life · 2024Pooled it
- Deep learning for the harmonization of structural MRI scans: a survey.Biomedical engineering online · 2024Review
- Endovaginal coil for pelvic high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of cervical cancer: a preliminary parameter optimization study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) exams are essential for diagnostic procedures, but their lengthy duration and associated costs limit their accessibility. Shorter scan times would reduce expenses and allow for more MRI exams, expanding the range of diagnostic procedures. This study investigated technical factors that could decrease scan time without compromising image quality, including field-of-view (FOV), phase field of view, phase oversampling, cross-talk, brain MRI imaging resolution, and scan time. Data were collected from September 2021 to June 2022. All patients underwent brain scans in the transverse plane following a standardized protocol using a 1.5-tesla Siemens Avanto MRI scanner. The protocol employed T2-weighted Turbo Spin Echo imaging. Twenty-four cases were included in this study. Initially, all participants underwent brain MRI scans using the original protocols with axial sections. The results indicated that altering the FOV phase and phase oversampling significantly affected the scan time, whereas other factors did not have a direct impact. The original protocol had a scan time of 3.47 minutes with a FOV of 230 mm, 90% FOV phase, and 0% phase oversampling. After implementing the modified protocol, the scan time was reduced to 2.18 minutes with a FOV of 217 mm and 93.98% phase oversampling of 13.96%. Statistical analysis confirmed the high significance of FOV phase and phase oversampling in reducing scan time. By optimizing these technical factors, MRI exams can be performed more efficiently, resulting in shorter scan times and potentially reducing costs. This would enhance patient comfort and enable a greater number of MRI exams, facilitating a more comprehensive range of diagnostic procedures.
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.