ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Optimizing hip MRI: enhancing image quality and elevating inter-observer consistency using deep learning-powered reconstruction.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical evaluation of deep learning accelerated lumbar T2-weighted and fat-suppressed MRI sequences.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConventional hip joint MRI scans necessitate lengthy scan durations, posing challenges for patient comfort and clinical efficiency. Previously, accelerated imaging techniques were constrained by a trade-off between noise and resolution. Leveraging deep learning-based reconstruction (DLR) holds the potential to mitigate scan time without compromising image quality.
methodsWe enrolled a cohort of sixty patients who underwent DL-MRI, conventional MRI, and No-DL MRI examinations to evaluate image quality. Key metrics considered in the assessment included scan duration, overall image quality, quantitative assessments of Relative Signal-to-Noise Ratio (rSNR), Relative Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (rCNR), and diagnostic efficacy. Two experienced radiologists independently assessed image quality using a 5-point scale (5 indicating the highest quality). To gauge interobserver agreement for the assessed pathologies across image sets, we employed weighted kappa statistics. Additionally, the Wilcoxon signed rank test was employed to compare image quality and quantitative rSNR and rCNR measurements.
resultsScan time was significantly reduced with DL-MRI and represented an approximate 66.5% reduction. DL-MRI consistently exhibited superior image quality in both coronal T2WI and axial T2WI when compared to both conventional MRI (p < 0.01) and No-DL-MRI (p < 0.01). Interobserver agreement was robust, with kappa values exceeding 0.735. For rSNR data, coronal fat-saturated(FS) T2WI and axial FS T2WI in DL-MRI consistently outperformed No-DL-MRI, with statistical significance (p < 0.01) observed in all cases. Similarly, rCNR data revealed significant improvements (p < 0.01) in coronal FS T2WI of DL-MRI when compared to No-DL-MRI. Importantly, our findings indicated that DL-MRI demonstrated diagnostic performance comparable to conventional MRI.
conclusionIntegrating deep learning-based reconstruction methods into standard clinical workflows has the potential to the promise of accelerating image acquisition, enhancing image clarity, and increasing patient throughput, thereby optimizing diagnostic efficiency.
trial registrationRetrospectively registered.
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.