ArticleNMR in biomedicine2026
Deep Learning HASTE for Upper Abdominal MRI: Improved Image Quality, Speed, and Energy Efficiency in a Prospective Study.
Article in NMR in biomedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Deep Learning HASTE for Upper Abdominal MRI: Improved Image Quality, Speed, and Energy Efficiency in a Prospective Study.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This prospective study aimed to perform a qualitative and quantitative comparison of deep learning (DL) and conventional T2-weighted Half-Fourier Acquisition Single-shot Turbo spin Echo (HASTE) sequences for 3T MRI acquisition of the upper abdomen. From January 2024 to April 2024, 166 patients (60 ± 14 years) scheduled for MRI of the upper abdomen were prospectively enrolled. Each patient underwent two MRI examinations: one using a conventional T2-weighted HASTE sequence, followed by a fast T2-weighted HASTE sequence reconstructed with DL. Image quality, anatomical structure visualization, and diagnostic performance were independently assessed by three readers using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative analysis included measurements of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for both sequences. Additionally, radiomic features were extracted and analyzed for significant variations. Interreader agreement was evaluated using Fleiss' Kappa. The DL HASTE sequence showed significantly superior overall image quality (p < 0.001), fewer artifacts (p < 0.001), and improved delineation of anatomical structures (p < 0.01) compared to the conventional T2-weighted HASTE sequence. DL sequences exhibited better SNR (p < 0.001), whereas CNR values did not show a difference between the two acquisition types. Radiomics feature analysis unveiled significant differences in contrast and gray-level characteristics (p ≤ 0.001). DL HASTE demonstrated a significant time reduction of 62.5% together with significant energy cost savings of 0.34 kW per scan compared to the conventional sequence acquisition. The DL HASTE sequence enhanced image quality and diagnostic confidence while minimizing artifacts, time, and energy costs, enabling a more accurate detection of pathologies than the conventional T2-weighted product solution with potential clinical impact.
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.