ArticleNMR in biomedicine2025
Whole Brain 3D T1 Mapping in Multiple Sclerosis Using Standard Clinical Images Compared to MP2RAGE and MR Fingerprinting.
Article in NMR in biomedicine, 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.
- Abdominal TMagma (New York, N.Y.) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative T1 and T2 mapping is a useful tool to assess properties of healthy and diseased tissues. However, clinical diagnostic imaging remains dominated by relaxation-weighted imaging without direct collection of relaxation maps. Dedicated research sequences such as MR fingerprinting can save time and improve resolution over classical gold standard quantitative MRI (qMRI) methods, although they are not widely adopted in clinical studies. We investigate the use of clinical sequences in conjunction with prior knowledge provided by machine learning to elucidate T1 maps of brain in routine imaging studies without the need for specialized sequences. A classification learner was trained on T1w (magnetization prepared rapid gradient echo [MPRAGE]) and T2w (fluid-attenuated inversion recovery [FLAIR]) data (2.6 million voxels) from multiple sclerosis (MS) patients at 3T, compared to gold standard inversion recovery fast spin echo T1 maps in five healthy subjects, and tested on eight MS patients. In the MS patient test, the results of the machine learner-produced T1 maps were compared to MP2RAGE and MR fingerprinting T1 maps in seven tissue regions of the brain: cortical grey matter, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid, caudate, putamen and globus pallidus. Additionally, T1s in lesion-segmented tissue was compared using the three different methods. The machine learner (ML) method had excellent agreement with MP2RAGE, with all average tissue deviations less than 3.2%, with T1 lesion variation of 0.1%-5.3% across the eight patients. The machine learning method provides a valuable and accurate estimation of T1 values in the human brain while using data from standard clinical sequences and allowing retrospective reconstruction from past studies without the need for new quantitative techniques.
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.