ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2025
The Pulseq-CEST Library: definition of preparations and simulations, example data, and example evaluations.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Open-Source, Reproducible MRI Data Acquisition and Reconstruction Workflow Using Pulseq: Multi-Site and Cross-Vendor Validation.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Effective Modeling of Continuous WaveMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Toward Free-Breathing Renal CEST MRI: Preclinical Evaluation of a Novel Prospective Respiratory Triggering Approach.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Optimization of Pulsed Saturation Transfer MR Fingerprinting (ST MRF) Acquisition Using the Cramér-Rao Bound and Sequential Quadratic Programming.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Multi-contrast generation and quantitative MRI using a transformer-based framework with RF excitation embeddings.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Reproducibility and quality assurance in MRI.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDespite prevalent use of chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI, standardization remains elusive. Imaging depends heavily on parameters dictating radiofrequency (RF) events, gradients, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). We present the Pulseq-CEST Library, a repository of CEST preparation and simulation definitions, including example data and evaluations, that provides a common basis for reproducible research, rapid prototyping, and in silico deep learning training data generation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA Pulseq-CEST experiment requires (i) a CEST preparation sequence, (ii) a Bloch-McConnell parameter set, (iii) a Bloch-McConnell simulation, and (iv) an evaluation script. Pulseq-CEST utilizes the Bloch-McConnell equations to model in vitro and in vivo conditions. Using this model, a candidate sequence or environment can be held constant while varying other inputs, enabling robust testing.
resultsData were compared for amide proton transfer weighted (APTw) and water shift and B1 (WASABI) protocols using a five-tube phantom and simulated environments. Real and simulated data matched anticipated spectral shapes and local peak characteristics. The Pulseq-CEST Library supports similar experiments with common sequences and environments to assess new protocols and sample data. DISCUSSION: The Pulseq-CEST Library provides a flexible mechanism for standardizing and prototyping CEST sequences, facilitating collaborative development. With the capability for expansion, including open-source incorporation of new sequences and environments, the library accelerates the invention and spread of novel CEST and other saturation transfer approaches, such as relayed NOEs (rNOEs) and semisolid magnetization transfer contrast (MTC) methods.
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.