ArticleNMR in biomedicine2025
An Optimized Framework of QSM Mask Generation Using Deep Learning: QSMmask-Net.
Article in NMR in biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 susceptibility mapping (QSM) provides the spatial distribution of magnetic susceptibility within tissues through sequential steps: phase unwrapping and echo combination, mask generation, background field removal, and dipole inversion. Accurate mask generation is crucial, as masks excluding regions outside the brain and without holes are necessary to minimize errors and streaking artifacts during QSM reconstruction. Variations in susceptibility values can arise from different mask generation methods, highlighting the importance of optimizing mask creation. In this study, we propose QSMmask-net, a deep neural network-based method for generating precise QSM masks. QSMmask-net achieved the highest Dice score compared to other mask generation methods. Mean susceptibility values using QSMmask-net masks showed the lowest differences from manual masks (ground truth) in simulations and healthy controls (no significant difference, p > 0.05). Linear regression analysis confirmed a strong correlation with manual masks for hemorrhagic lesions (slope = 0.9814 ± 0.007, intercept = 0.0031 ± 0.001, R
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.