ArticleNeonatology2024
Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Reference Values for Two-Dimensional Quantitative Brain Metrics in a Cohort of Extremely Preterm Infants.
Article in Neonatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Postnatal Steroids in Preterm Infants: A Narrative Review Series-Part 3: Impacts on Growth, Neurodevelopment & Nutrition.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Ventricular size on term magnetic resonance imaging in extremely preterm infants with and without germinal matrix-intraventricular haemorrhage.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- SEPoolConvNeXt: A Deep Learning Framework for Automated Classification of Neonatal Brain Development Using T1- and T2-Weighted MRI.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Cerebellar haemorrhage and atrophy in infants born extremely preterm with intraventricular haemorrhage.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCerebral magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) is an important diagnostic tool in neonatology. In addition to qualitative analysis, quantitative measurements may help identify infants with impaired brain growth. This study aimed to create reference values for brain metrics of various brain areas in neonates without major brain injuries born before 28 weeks of gestation.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzes cMRI imaging data of high-risk patients without severe brain pathologies at term-equivalent age, collected over 4 years since November 2017. Nineteen brain areas were measured, reference values created, and compared to published values from fetal and postnatal MRI. Furthermore, correlations between brain metrics and gestational age at birth were evaluated.
resultsA total of 174 cMRI examinations were available for analysis. Reference values including cut-offs for impaired brain growth were established for different gestational age groups. There was a significant correlation between gestational age at birth and larger "tissue" parameters, as well as smaller "fluid" parameters, including intracerebral and extracerebral spaces. DISCUSSION: With quantitative brain metrics infants with impaired brain growth might be detected earlier. Compared to preexisting reference values, these are the first of a contemporary collective of extremely preterm neonates without severe brain injuries. Measurements can be easily performed by radiologists as well as neonatologists without specialized equipment or computational expertise.
conclusionTwo-dimensional cMRI brain measurements at term-equivalent age represent an easy and reliable approach for the evaluation of brain size and growth in infants at high risk for neurodevelopmental impairment.
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.