ArticleMagnetic resonance in chemistry : MRC2025
Non-Uniform Sampling for Quantitative NOESY.
Article in Magnetic resonance in chemistry : MRC, 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.
- Pulse Programme Considerations for Quantitative NOE Analysis.Magnetic resonance in chemistry : MRC · 2026Article
- Structural determination of natural products at speeds and scale of high-throughput screening.Natural product reports · 2026Review
- Decoherence Principles and Algorithms for One-Dimensional Nonuniform Sampling Schedules for Multidimensional NMR.Analytical chemistry · 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
Non-uniform sampling (NUS) enables faster acquisition of NMR spectra. Concerns about spectral fidelity, particularly in high-dynamic-range experiments like NOESY, have limited its quantitative applications. In this study, we assessed whether optimised Poisson-gap sampling schemes can generate high-fidelity spectra suitable for quantitation and evaluated the effectiveness of NUS ranking tools, NUSscore and nus-tool, in identifying optimal sampling schemes. A total of 25,000 Poisson-gap sampling schemes were generated and ranked using NUSscore, with a subset of 11 of these spanning the score distribution, alongside 15 random-shuffle and the highest and lowest scoring Poisson-gap schemes determined using the signal apex-to-artefact ratio were used for comparison, all with 50% sampling coverage. Additionally, hybrid sampling schemes incorporating a long initial uniformly sampled section, termed US-NUS hybrid schemes, were evaluated. Spectral fidelity was evaluated on interproton distance accuracy, including the proportion of retained interproton distances and their deviation from uniformly sampled reference spectra. NUSscore showed a strong correlation with spectral fidelity. The peak-to-sidelobe ratio implemented in nus-tool showed no correlation, with the relative sensitivity metric showing a weak correlation. Signal-to-artefact apex ratio was also not predictive for identifying sampling schedules with maintained interproton distances. All Poisson-gap sampling schemes however outperformed random-shuffle. The US-NUS hybrids demonstrated improved interproton distance conservation than traditional Poisson-gap sampling schemes with a low seed dependence, making them a promising sampling schedule for quantitative NOESY analysis.
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.