ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025
Cerebellar imaging for neuroscience at 9.4 T.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 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.
- Advancing Cerebro-cerebellar Network Imaging with Ultra-high Field (7T) MRI: Progress and Future Challenges.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Review
- The In Vivo Microstructural Profile of Human Hippocampal Subfield CA1 and Its Relation to Memory Performance.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Cerebellar imaging for neuroscience at 9.4 T.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study explored the possibility of visualizing cerebellar structure and function in vivo with a 9.4 T protocol suitable for neuroscientific experiments.
methodsSix healthy individuals were scanned with a 9.4 T acquisition protocol including functional runs using BOLD-weighted 3D EPI at 0.8 and 1.0 mm isotropic resolution, and a 0.4 mm MP2RAGE covering the entire cerebellum to derive cerebellar cortical surfaces.
resultsScan sessions took approximately 1 h, a duration generally well tolerated in (cognitive) neuroscience experiments. A generalized B
conclusionThese experiments show that it is feasible to undertake neuroscientific experiments in the human cerebellum using 9.4 T MRI. The increased SNR and BOLD sensitivity benefit both structural and functional acquisitions and derivatives such as cortical surfaces generated from these data.
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.