ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2024
Facilitating diffusion tensor imaging of the brain during continuous gross head motion with first and second order motion compensating diffusion gradients.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Motion-Compensated Diffusion Imaging With Phase-Contrast for Robust Quantification of Regional Cerebral Blood Flow.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
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
purposeTo demonstrate the feasibility of motion compensating diffusion gradient schemes in the acquisition of quality diffusion tensor images (DTI) of the brain during continuous gross head motion.
methodsFive healthy subjects were scanned using a clinical 3 T MRI with and without continuous head motion. For one volunteer, DTI data was acquired using standard (M0) diffusion-weighted (DW) gradients, and first (M1) and second (M2) order gradient schemes that were previously developed for use in cardiac DTI. In four additional volunteers, DTI data was acquired with M0 and M2 gradients. DTI parameters were calculated and compared with established retrospective motion corrections.
resultsIn the absence of motion, DTI parameters calculated from M0, M1, and M2 data were consistent. In the presence of motion, up to 44% of DW images acquired with M0 gradients were corrupted by signal dropout, compared to 0% of the M2 images. In voxelwise comparisons, DTI parameters calculated using motion-M0 data were elevated compared to reference data. Retrospective corrections for extreme motion applied to motion-M0 data did not improve consistency with reference data in cases where motion corrupted >15% of DW images. In contrast, DTI parameters calculated with motion-M2 data were consistent with reference data.
conclusionThis proof-of-principle study demonstrates that motion compensating diffusion gradients can mitigate artifacts because of continuous motion in DTI of the brain and offers promise for improved DTI accessibility. Further study will be necessary to determine the robustness of the approach in patient populations with high susceptibility to head motion.
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.