ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2024
GABA-edited MEGA-PRESS at 3 T: Does a measured macromolecule background improve linear combination modeling?
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MR Spectroscopy Without Water Suppression Using the Gradient Impulse Response Function.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- In vivo GABA detection by single-pulse editing with one shot.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe J-difference edited γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) signal is contaminated by other co-edited signals-the largest of which originates from co-edited macromolecules (MMs)-and is consequently often reported as "GABA+." MM signals are broader and less well-characterized than the metabolites, and are commonly approximated using a Gaussian model parameterization. Experimentally measured MM signals are a consensus-recommended alternative to parameterized modeling; however, they are relatively under-studied in the context of edited MRS.
methodsTo address this limitation in the literature, we have acquired GABA-edited MEGA-PRESS data with pre-inversion to null metabolite signals in 13 healthy controls. An experimental MM basis function was derived from the mean across subjects. We further derived a new parameterization of the MM signals from the experimental data, using multiple Gaussians to accurately represent their observed asymmetry. The previous single-Gaussian parameterization, mean experimental MM spectrum and new multi-Gaussian parameterization were compared in a three-way analysis of a public MEGA-PRESS dataset of 61 healthy participants.
resultsBoth the experimental MMs and the multi-Gaussian parameterization exhibited reduced fit residuals compared to the single-Gaussian approach (p = 0.034 and p = 0.031, respectively), suggesting they better represent the underlying data than the single-Gaussian parameterization. Furthermore, both experimentally derived models estimated larger MM fractional contribution to the GABA+ signal for the experimental MMs (58%) and multi-Gaussian parameterization (58%), compared to the single-Gaussian approach (50%).
conclusionsOur results indicate that single-Gaussian parameterization of edited MM signals is insufficient and that both experimentally derived GABA+ spectra and their parameterized replicas improve the modeling of GABA+ spectra.
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.