ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025
Reproducibility of tailored and universal nonselective excitation pulses at 7 T for human cardiac MRI: A 3-year and an interday study.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic resonance imaging.Science advances · 2026Review
- Reproducibility of tailored and universal nonselective excitation pulses at 7 T for human cardiac MRI: A 3-year and an interday study.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeUltrahigh-field (UHF; ≥7 T) MRI is challenging due to spatially heterogeneous B
methodsSix healthy subjects underwent 7 T MRI scans performed by different MR operators using a 32-element parallel-transmission body array at four time points over 3 years. A single UP was computed and applied to all subjects. TPs were computed individually for each scan and organized into four configurations. Each configuration was applied to all scans from each subject to analyze intrasubject variability. Reproducibility was assessed by comparing the coefficient of variation (CV) of simulated flip angles (FAs) within the heart volume across scan sessions.
resultsTPs designed for a specific scan session yielded lower CVs (2-fold reduction) than UP. Applying TPs to other scan sessions of the same subject, however, resulted in approximately 40% higher CVs and lower FA uniformity compared with the UP. On average, the UP consistently achieved the most reproducible results across inter-year, inter-day, and same-operator studies, with CVs of approximately 12%.
conclusionAlthough TPs showed advantages when tailored for a specific target volume, they struggled with long-term consistency and required lengthy calibration. The precomputed UP kT-points pulses proved to be the most consistent across all scans acquired in the 3 years by different operators, minimizing CV-data dispersion and maintaining FA uniformity.
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.