SynthesisF1000Research2025
Applications of MR Finger printing derived T1 and T2 values in Adult brain: A Systematic review.
Synthesis in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning based radiomics approach for outcome prediction of meningioma - a systematic review.F1000Research · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical Feasibility of Deep Learning Contrast Synthesis From MR Fingerprinting in Knee Osteoarthritis.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
- Ultra-Fast IntraoperativeInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Current Clinical Applications of Structural MRI in Neurological Disorders.Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for brain imaging, but conventional methods rely on qualitative contrast, are time-intensive, and prone to variability. Magnetic resonance finger printing (MRF) addresses these limitations by enabling fast, simultaneous mapping of multiple tissue properties like T1, T2. Using dynamic acquisition parameters and a precomputed signal dictionary, MRF provides robust, qualitative maps, improving diagnostic precision and expanding clinical and research applications in brain imaging. Methods: Database searches were performed through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of science to identify relevant articles focusing on the application of MR finger printing in the adult brain. We utilized the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines to extract data from the selected studies. Results: Nine articles were included in the final review, with a total sample size of 332 participants. In healthy brains, notable regional, sex, age, and hemispheric variations were identified, particularly in the corpus callosum and thalamus. MRF effectively differentiated meningioma subtypes, glioma grades, and IDH mutation status, with T2 values providing particularly predictive for glioma classification. In brain metastases, significant relaxometry differences were noted between normal and lesional tissues. For multiple sclerosis, MRF values correlated with clinical and disability measures, distinguishing relapsing-remitting secondary progressive forms. In traumatic brain injury, longitudinal T1 changes strongly correlated with clinical recovery, surpassing T2 values. Conclusions: The systematic review highlighted MRD as a groundbreaking technique that enhances neurological diagnosis by simultaneously quantifying T1 and T2 relaxation times. With reduced acquisition times, MRF outperforms conventional MRI in detecting subtle pathologies, distinguishing properties, and providing reliable biomarkers.
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.