ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2025
Evaluating spatial resolution in prostate MR images: the utility of the ladder method.
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. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluating prostate MRI resolution is challenging due to motion artifacts caused by body movement or intestinal gas, which can degrade image quality. One simple approach to resolution assessment is the ladder method, but reports of its application to clinical images remain limited. This study aimed to compare the ladder method with visual evaluation to assess its utility.
methodsT2-weighted images of the prostate in healthy volunteers and a ladder phantom at various resolutions with altered pixel sizes (0.5, 0.7, 0.9 and 1.1 mm) were acquired. Three radiologists conducted visual evaluations of the prostate images. Correlation coefficients between the visual evaluation scores and the ladder index (LI) obtained from the ladder method were compared.
resultsAverage visual evaluation scores were 7.7, 5.9, 3.8, and 2.1, while the spatial frequencies corresponding to LI = 0.5 (50%LI) were 0.86, 0.81, 0.54, and 0.42 cycles/mm for each pixel size ranging from 0.5 to 1.1 mm, demonstrating higher values at smaller pixel sizes. The correlation coefficients exceeded 0.7 at most spatial frequencies, indicating a strong correlation. Inter-reader agreement was high (Kendall's W = 0.87), indicating consistent evaluation among radiologists.
conclusionsSpatial resolution for prostate MRI could be evaluated objectively using the ladder method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40418515What 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.