ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
The effect of head coil configuration and channel count on the quality of double inversion recovery (DIR) MRI images.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDouble inversion recovery (DIR) MRI provides high sensitivity for detecting white matter abnormalities but suffers from reduced signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) due to simultaneous suppression of multiple tissue signals. Head-coil configuration and channel count may influence the resulting image quality.
methodsSeventeen healthy subjects underwent DIR imaging on a 3-T MRI system using both 64-channel and 20-channel head/neck coils. Quantitative image quality was assessed using SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) measurements across multiple brain regions, with comparisons performed using paired t-tests. Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM) was additionally computed between registered 64-channel and 20-channel DIR images to quantify inter-coil structural image similarity. Qualitative image quality was evaluated by three experienced neuroradiologists using a 5-point rating scale for contrast, spatial resolution, and noise; inter-rater agreement was assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W).
resultsQuantitative analysis demonstrated significantly higher SNR and CNR values for the 64-channel coil compared with the 20-channel coil across all assessed regions (p < 0.0001). Qualitative evaluation showed that images acquired with the 64-channel coil received marginally higher mean scores for contrast, spatial resolution, and noise from all raters; inter-rater agreement was moderate-to-strong across all domains (Kendall's W = 0.33-0.89).
conclusionAt 3 T, the use of a 64-channel head/neck coil provides significant quantitative improvements in DIR image quality compared with a 20-channel coil, with small but consistent advantages also observed in qualitative assessments. These findings support the use of higher-channel-count coils to mitigate SNR limitations inherent to DIR imaging. However, qualitative differences between coil configurations were modest and inter-rater agreement was moderate-to-strong by Kendall's W (W = 0.33-0.89). The clinical benefit of the 64-channel coil in pathological conditions such as multiple sclerosis or cortical dysplasia requires further investigation in patient-based studies.
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.