ArticleOral radiology2026
Comparison of supine and prone positions for dental MRI with a microscopy coil: image quality and patient burden in healthy volunteers.
Article in Oral radiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical feasibility of dental magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using a microscopy coil by comparing imaging positions in healthy volunteers.
methodsTwenty-six healthy volunteers underwent dental MRI in supine and prone positions using a 47 mm microscopy coil on a 3.0T system. T1-weighted (T1W), T2-weighted (T2W), and proton density-weighted (PDW) sequences were acquired. Participant-reported burden was assessed using a 10-point scale. Image quality was evaluated using a 4-point scale for sharpness, artifact, perceived signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and overall quality. SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated from 1 mm
resultsParticipant-reported burden was lower in the supine position (1.7 ± 1.1) than in the prone (4.7 ± 2.1). Visual assessments demonstrated superior image quality in supine across all sequences. The proportion of non-diagnostic images was higher in the prone position: T1W (50% vs. 19%), T2W (46% vs. 4%), and PDW (38% vs. 8%). SNR and CNR showed no differences between positions. Image quality degraded with prolonged examination time regardless of position.
conclusionsThe supine position demonstrated lower subjective burden, better visual image quality, and a lower rate of non-diagnostic images compared with the prone position. Image quality was optimal when MRI was performed early in the examination sequence. These findings suggest that the supine position would be more appropriate imaging position for dental MRI using a microscopy coil.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42105135What 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.