ArticlePloS one2024
Non-Cartesian 3D-SPARKLING vs Cartesian 3D-EPI encoding schemes for functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 7 Tesla.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- SNAKE: A modular realistic fMRI data simulator from the space-time domain to k-space and back.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The quest for higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in functional MRI (fMRI) while preserving a sufficient temporal signal-to-noise ratio (tSNR) has generated a tremendous amount of methodological contributions in the last decade ranging from Cartesian vs. non-Cartesian readouts, 2D vs. 3D acquisition strategies, parallel imaging and/or compressed sensing (CS) accelerations and simultaneous multi-slice acquisitions to cite a few. In this paper, we investigate the use of a finely tuned version of 3D-SPARKLING. This is a non-Cartesian CS-based acquisition technique for high spatial resolution whole-brain fMRI. We compare it to state-of-the-art Cartesian 3D-EPI during both a retinotopic mapping paradigm and resting-state acquisitions at 1mm3 (isotropic spatial resolution). This study involves six healthy volunteers and both acquisition sequences were run on each individual in a randomly-balanced order across subjects. The performances of both acquisition techniques are compared to each other in regards to tSNR, sensitivity to the BOLD effect and spatial specificity. Our findings reveal that 3D-SPARKLING has a higher tSNR than 3D-EPI, an improved sensitivity to detect the BOLD contrast in the gray matter, and an improved spatial specificity. Compared to 3D-EPI, 3D-SPARKLING yields, on average, 7% more activated voxels in the gray matter relative to the total number of activated voxels.
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.