ArticlePlacenta2024
Single vs. multi-slice assessments of in vivo placental T2∗ measurements.
Article in Placenta, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPlacental health is vital for maternal and fetal well-being, and placental T2∗ has been suggested to identify in vivo placental dysfunction prior to delivery. However, ideal regions of interest to best inform functional assessments of the placenta remain unknown. The aim of this study is to compare global and slice-wise measures of in-vivo placental T2∗ assessments.
methodsThis prospective study recruited pregnant people with singleton pregnancies between December 2017 and February 2022.3D multi-echo RF-spoiled gradient echo sequences were acquired, and placental T2∗ values were derived from global and slice-wise approaches. Statistical analyses included Pearson correlation coefficients, concordance correlation coefficients (CCC), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman analyses.
resultsOf 115 participants (mean gestational age, 29.25 ± 5.05 weeks), 68 were healthy controls, and 47 were high-risk pregnancies. Global and slice-wise placental T2∗ assessments for the entire cohort showed no significant difference nor for individual subgroups (healthy controls or high-risk). Pearson correlation values ranged between 0.88 and 0.99 for mean global and slice-wise placental T2∗. CCC analyses ranged from 0.88 to 0.99 for mean T2∗, and ICC analyses ranged between 0.88 and 0.99 for mean T2∗, showing a strong agreement between measurements. Bland-Altman analyses depicted T2∗ differences across coverage methods, and groups resided within the 95 % limits of agreement. DISCUSSION: Single-slice placental assessments offer robust, comparable T2∗ values to global assessments, with the added benefit of reducing post-processing time and SAR exposure. This supports slice-wise approaches as valid alternatives for assessing placental health in various pregnancies.
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.