Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39552181›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025

A bootstrapping residuals approach to determine the error in quantitative functional lung imaging.

Anne Slawig, Andreas Max Weng, Simon Veldhoen, Herbert Köstler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anne SlawigDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1412-244X
Andreas Max WengDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8943-3539
Simon VeldhoenDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Herbert KöstlerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Funding

German Research Foundation 363014928
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo implement and validate an algorithm to determine the statistical errors in self-gated non-contrast-enhanced functional lung imaging.

methodsA bootstrapping residuals approach to determine the error in quantitative functional lung imaging is proposed. Precision and accuracy of the median error over the lungs, as well as reproducibility of the approach were investigated in 7 volunteers. The algorithm was additionally applied to data acquired in a patient with cystic fibrosis.

resultsThe obtained bootstrapping error maps appear comparable to the error maps determined from repeated measurements, and median absolute error values for both methods show comparable median errors when reducing the number of averages. In a volunteer in whom 10 consecutive measurements were carried out, the median functional parameters were ventilation = 0.22 mL gas/mL lung tissue, perfusion amplitude = 0.028, perfusion timing = -82 ms, whereas precision and accuracy of the median error were below 3.2 × 10

conclusionUsing a bootstrapping residuals method, the error of functional lung MRI could be determined without the need for repeated measurements. The error values can be determined reproducibly and can be used as a future means of quality control for functional lung MRI.

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedLungMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificitybootstrappingerror mapsfunctional lung imagingperfusionSENCEFULventilation

Identifiers

PMID39552181
PMCPMC11782724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.