ArticleFrontiers in radiology2026
The efficacy of multisite MRI scanners for total brain volume measurements: a cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Frontiers in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate estimation of brain structure and volume is essential in multi-scanner MRI studies investigating neurological condition. This study examines the effect of cross-scanner differences, incorporating field strength, vendor, and sequence variations, on brain volumetric measurements in Saudi adults. Objective: to evaluate the agreement, reliability and the magnitude and direction of the systematic bias of volumetric measurements between two MRI systems (1.5 T and 3 T) differing in field strength, vendor, and sequence using a within-subject same-day design. Material and methods: 38 healthy participants (25.8 ± 5.6 years; 52.6% men) were scanned back-to-back on 1.5 T GE OPTIMA 450W (SPGR) at 3 T Siemens Skyra (MPRAGE). The images were analyzed using FreeSurfer v7.1.1 (longitudinal stream). To evaluate mean-level bias, a series of paired t-tests, percent differences, and false-discovery-rate (FDR) - adjusted Results: The global volume measurements were nearly the same on both scanners (total brain: 1 185 ± 99 mL at 1.5 T vs.1 179 ± 103 mL at 3 T; -0.6% mean difference, d = 0.07; FDR- Conclusion: There is high reliability and agreement for whole-brain, cortical, and most subcortical measures between the two MRI scanners under controlled acquisition and standardized processing conditions. Systematic, region-specific biases, especially in the putamen, amygdala, accumbens, and thalamus, necessitate harmonization prior to pooling multisite data.
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.