ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
Validation and Feasibility of Ultrafast Cervical Spine MRI Using a Deep Learning-Assisted 3D Iterative Image Enhancement System.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The scientific evidence of commercial AI products for MRI acceleration: a systematic review.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Validation and feasibility of fast knee MRI using a deep learning-assisted 3D iterative image enhancement system.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- FOCUS-DWI improves prostate cancer detection through deep learning reconstruction with IQMR technology.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Feasibility of artificial intelligence-assisted fast magnetic resonance imaging technology in the ankle joint injury: a comparison of the proton density-weighted image.Frontiers in radiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of ultrafast (2 min) cervical spine MRI protocol using a deep learning-assisted 3D iterative image enhancement (DL-3DIIE) system, compared to a conventional MRI protocol (6 min 14s). Patients and Methods: Fifty-one patients were recruited and underwent cervical spine MRI using conventional and ultrafast protocols. A DL-3DIIE system was applied to the ultrafast protocol to compensate for the spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of images. Two radiologists independently assessed and graded the quality of images from the dimensions of artifacts, boundary sharpness, visibility of lesions and overall image quality. We recorded the presence or absence of different pathologies. Moreover, we examined the interchangeability of the two protocols by computing the 95% confidence interval of the individual equivalence index, and also evaluated the inter-protocol intra-observer agreement using Cohen's weighted kappa. Results: Ultrafast-DL-3DIIE images were significantly better than conventional ones for artifacts and equivalent for other qualitative features. The number of cases with different kinds of pathologies was indistinguishable based on the MR images from ultrafast-DL-3DIIE and conventional protocols. With the exception of disc degeneration, the 95% confidence interval for the individual equivalence index across all variables did not surpass 5%, suggesting that the two protocols are interchangeable. The kappa values of these evaluations by the two radiologists ranged from 0.65 to 0.88, indicating good-to-excellent agreement. Conclusion: The DL-3DIIE system enables 67% spine MRI scan time reduction while obtaining at least equivalent image quality and diagnostic results compared to the conventional protocol, suggesting its potential for clinical utility.
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.