ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2026
Comparative analysis of
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWhile most sodium (
methodsTwenty healthy volunteers underwent
resultsT₁ increased with field strength (3 T 26.5 ± 2.0 ms; 7 T 28.1 ± 1.7 ms), while long T₂* decreased (3 T T₂
conclusionsThis study provides reference values for sodium T₁ and bi-exponential T₂* relaxation in human skeletal muscle at 3 T and 7 T and demonstrates high reproducibility of aTSC across field strengths.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42627565What 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.