ArticleNMR in biomedicine2025
Enhancing amide proton transfer imaging in ischemic stroke using a machine learning approach with partially synthetic data.
Article in NMR in biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced Quantitative Phosphocreatine MR Imaging of Skeletal Muscle Using a Global-Local Two-Branch Deep Learning Model.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- A rapid and accurate guanidine CEST imaging in ischemic stroke using a machine learning approach.Physics in medicine and biology · 2026Article
- Enhancing amide proton transfer imaging in ischemic stroke using a machine learning approach with partially synthetic data.NMR in biomedicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Amide proton transfer (APT) imaging, a technique sensitive to tissue pH, holds promise in the diagnosis of ischemic stroke. Achieving accurate and rapid APT imaging is crucial for this application. However, conventional APT quantification methods either lack accuracy or are time-consuming. Machine learning (ML) has recently been recognized as a potential solution to improve APT quantification. In this paper, we applied an ML model trained on a new type of partially synthetic data, along with an optimization approach utilizing recursive feature elimination, to predict APT imaging in an animal stroke model. This partially synthetic datum is not a simple blend of measured and simulated chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) signals. Rather, it integrates the underlying components including all CEST, direct water saturation, and magnetization transfer effects partly derived from measurements and simulations to reconstruct the CEST signals using an inverse summation relationship. Training with partially synthetic data requires less in vivo data compared to training entirely with fully synthetic or in vivo data, making it a more practical approach. Since this type of data closely resembles real tissue, it leads to more accurate predictions than ML models trained on fully synthetic data. Results indicate that an ML model trained on this partially synthetic data can successfully predict the APT effect with enhanced accuracy, providing significant contrast between stroke lesions and normal tissues, thus clearly delineating lesions. In contrast, conventional quantification methods such as the asymmetric analysis method, three-point method, and multiple-pool model Lorentzian fit showed inadequate accuracy in quantifying the APT effect. Moreover, ML methods trained using in vivo data and fully synthetic data exhibited poor predictive performance due to insufficient training data and inaccurate simulation pool settings or parameter ranges, respectively. Following optimization, only 13 frequency offsets were selected from the initial 69, resulting in significantly reduced scan time.
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.