ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025
Quantitative multislice and jointly optimized rapid CEST for in vivo whole-brain imaging.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Interpretable Deep-Learning Approach for Efficient CEST Parameter Quantification: Importance-Ranked Saturation Transfer MRI Protocol.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Dynamic glucose-enhanced MRI in brain tumors.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Quantitative multislice and jointly optimized rapid CEST for in vivo whole-brain imaging.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop a quantitative multislice chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) schedule optimization and pulse sequence that reduces the loss of sensitivity inherent to multislice sequences.
methodsA deep learning framework was developed for simultaneous optimization of scan parameters and slice order. The optimized sequence was tested in numerical simulations against a random schedule and an optimized single-slice schedule. The scan efficiency of each schedule was quantified. Three healthy subjects were scanned with the proposed sequence. Regions of interest in white matter (WM) and gray matter (GM) were defined. The sequence was compared with the single-slice sequence in vivo and differences quantified using Bland-Altman plots. Test-retest reproducibility was assessed, and the Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was calculated for WM and GM. Intersubject variability was also measured with the CCC. Feasibility of whole-brain clinical imaging was tested using a multislab acquisition in 1 subject.
resultsThe optimized multislice sequence yielded a lower mean error than the random schedule for all tissue parameters and a lower error than the optimized single-slice schedule for four of six parameters. The optimized multislice sequence provided the highest scan efficiency. In vivo tissue-parameter values obtained with the proposed sequence agreed well with those of the optimized single-slice sequence and prior studies. The average WM/GM CCC was 0.8151/0.7779 for the test-retest scans and 0.7792/0.7191 for the intersubject variability experiment.
conclusionA multislice schedule optimization framework and pulse sequence were demonstrated for quantitative CEST. The proposed approach enables accurate and reproducible whole-brain quantitative CEST imaging in clinically relevant scan times.
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.