ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2026
Well-designed k-space coverage is important for good MRI denoising.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveModern computational MRI denoising approaches are often designed assuming fixed k-space coverage. This contrasts with earlier acquisition-design literature that leveraged k-space coverage modifications (e.g., reducing spatial resolution) to improve SNR. This work investigates whether the performance of modern computational denoising methods can be further enhanced by k-space coverage modifications. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing realistic simulations of noisy data, k-space coverage and averaging patterns were optimized for two advanced image denoising/reconstruction approaches: parallel imaging with total variation regularization and a U-Net neural network. For reference, comparisons against classical linear filtering/apodization methods were also performed. Performance was quantified using normalized root-mean-squared error (NRMSE) and structural similarity (SSIM) metrics.
resultsAdvanced computational denoising methods can be substantially enhanced, both quantitatively and qualitatively, by reducing the spatial resolution of the acquisition to improve SNR. Indeed, even simple linear filtering/apodization with optimized k-space coverage can rival advanced methods using naive higher-resolution coverage. DISCUSSION: Classical acquisition design principles that allow spatial resolution to be traded for SNR enhancement are still very relevant for modern computational denoising techniques. However, the optimization of k-space coverage and denoising/reconstruction methods can also be somewhat confounded because the NRMSE and SSIM metrics have low sensitivity to spatial resolution.
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.