ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Consistency and stability of individualized cortical functional networks parcellation at 3.0 T and 5.0 T MRI.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- 5 T versus 3 T MRI for prostate cancer: an intra-individual prospective comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Individual-specific functional connectivity predicts clinical symptoms severity in patients with post-traumatic stress disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI techniques for brain imaging at 3T and 5T magnetic field strengths.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- The Value of Using 5T MRI T1ρ and T2 Mapping Sequences in Evaluating Muscle Changes Around Knee Osteoarthritis.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
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
Background: Individualized cortical functional networks parcellation has been reported as highly reproducible at 3.0 T. However, in view of the complexity of cortical networks and the greatly increased sensitivity provided by ultra-high field 5.0 T MRI, the parcellation consistency between different magnetic fields is unclear. Purpose: To explore the consistency and stability of individualized cortical functional networks parcellation at 3.0 T and 5.0 T MRI based on spatial and functional connectivity analysis. Materials and methods: Thirty healthy young participants were enrolled. Each subject underwent resting-state fMRI at both 3.0 T and 5.0 T in a random order in less than 48 h. The individualized cortical functional networks was parcellated for each subject using a previously proposed iteration algorithm. Dice coefficient was used to evaluate the spatial consistency of parcellated networks between 3.0 T and 5.0 T. Functional connectivity (FC) consistency was evaluated using the Euclidian distance and Graph-theory metrics. Results: A functional cortical atlas consisting of 18 networks was individually parcellated at 3.0 T and 5.0 T. The spatial consistency of these networks at 3.0 T and 5.0 T for the same subject was significantly higher than that of inter-individuals. The FC between the 18 networks acquired at 3.0 T and 5.0 T were highly consistent for the same subject. Positive cross-subject correlations in Graph-theory metrics were found between 3.0 T and 5.0 T. Conclusion: Individualized cortical functional networks at 3.0 T and 5.0 T showed consistent and stable parcellation results both spatially and functionally. The 5.0 T MR provides finer functional sub-network characteristics than that of 3.0 T.
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.