ArticleArXiv2025
Imaging Transformer for MRI Denoising: a Scalable Model Architecture that enables
Article in ArXiv, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To propose a flexible and scalable imaging transformer (IT) architecture with three attention modules for multi-dimensional imaging data and apply it to MRI denoising with very low input SNR. Methods: Three independent attention modules were developed: spatial local, spatial global, and frame attentions. They capture long-range signal correlation and bring back the locality of information in images. An attention-cell-block design processes 5D tensors ([B, C, F, H, W]) for 2D, 2D+T, and 3D image data. A High Resolution (HRNet) backbone was built to hold IT blocks. Training dataset consists of 206,677 cine series and test datasets had 7,267 series. Ten input SNR levels from 0.05 to 8.0 were tested. IT models were compared to seven convolutional and transformer baselines. To test scalability, four IT models 27m to 218m parameters were trained. Two senior cardiologists reviewed IT model outputs from which the EF was measured and compared against the ground-truth. Results: IT models significantly outperformed other models over the tested SNR levels. The performance gap was most prominent at low SNR levels. The IT-218m model had the highest SSIM and PSNR, restoring good image quality and anatomical details even at SNR 0.2. Two experts agreed at this SNR or above, the IT model output gave the same clinical interpretation as the ground-truth. The model produced images that had accurate EF measurements compared to ground-truth values. Conclusions: Imaging transformer model offers strong performance, scalability, and versatility for MR denoising. It recovers image quality suitable for confident clinical reading and accurate EF measurement, even at very low input SNR of 0.2.
Identifiers
40735083PMC12306840What 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.