ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Evaluation of Artifact Appearance and Burden in Pediatric Brain Tumor MR Imaging with Compressed Sensing in Comparison to Conventional Parallel Imaging Acceleration.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accelerating brain T2-weighted imaging using artificial intelligence-assisted compressed sensing combined with deep learning-based reconstruction: a feasibility study at 5.0T MRI.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- AI-Assisted Compressed Sensing Enables Faster Brain MRI for the Elderly: Image Quality and Diagnostic Equivalence with Conventional Imaging.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Optimizing ultra-rapid compressed-sensing MPRAGE acquisitions for brain morphometry.Frontiers in neuroimaging · 2025Article
- Observation of intracranial artery and venous sinus hemodynamics using compressed sensing-accelerated 4D flow MRI: performance at different acceleration factors.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aims for the highest possible image quality, while balancing the need for acceptable examination time, reasonable signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and lowest artifact burden. With a recently introduced imaging acceleration technique, compressed sensing, the acquisition speed and image quality of pediatric brain tumor exams can be improved. However, little attention has been paid to its impact on method-related artifacts in pediatric brain MRI. This study assessed the overall artifact burden and artifact appearances in a standardized pediatric brain tumor MRI by comparing conventional parallel imaging acceleration with compressed sensing. This showed that compressed sensing resulted in fewer physiological artifacts in the FLAIR sequence, and a reduction in technical artifacts in the 3D T1 TFE sequences. Only a slight difference was noted in the T2 TSE sequence. A relatively new range of artifacts, which are likely technique-related, was noted in the 3D T1 TFE sequences. In conclusion, by equipping a basic pediatric brain tumor protocol for 3T MRI with compressed sensing, the overall burden of common artifacts can be reduced. However, attention should be paid to novel compressed-sensing-specific artifacts.
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.