ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025
Machine learning-based multi-pool Voigt fitting of CEST, rNOE, and MTC in Z-spectra.
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 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.
- Radiofrequency bandwidth effects in direct saturation dynamic glucose enhanced MRI at 3T.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFour-pool Voigt (FPV) machine learning (ML)-based fitting for Z-spectra was developed to reduce fitting times for clinical feasibility in terms of on-scanner analysis and to promote larger cohort studies. The approach was compared to four-pool Lorentzian (FPL)-ML-based modeling to empirically verify the advantage of Voigt models for Z-spectra.
methodsVoigt and Lorentzian models were fitted to human 3 T Z-spectral data using least squares (LS) to generate training data for the corresponding ML versions. Gradient boosting decision trees were trained, resulting in one Voigt and one Lorentzian ML model. Modeling accuracy was tested, and the fitting times of the ML models and LS versions were evaluated. The goodness of fits of Voigt and Lorentzian ML models were compared.
resultsThe training time for each ML model (Voigt and Lorentzian) was less than 1 min, and the modeling accuracy compared to the corresponding LS versions was excellent, as indicated by a nonsignificant difference between the parameters obtained by LS and corresponding ML versions. The average fitting time was 20 μs/spectrum for both ML models compared to 0.27 and 0.82 s/spectrum for LS with FPL and FPV, respectively. The goodness of fits of FPV-ML and FPL-ML differed significantly (p < 0.005), with FPV-ML showing an improvement for all tested data.
conclusionGradient boosting decision trees fitting of multi-pool Z-spectra significantly reduces fitting times compared to traditional LS approaches, allowing fast data processing while upholding fitting quality. Along with the short training times, this makes the method suitable for clinical settings and for large cohort research applications. The FPV-ML approach provides a significant improvement of goodness of fit compared to FPL-ML.
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.