ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Diagnostic image quality of shoulder magnetic resonance imaging at 0.55T in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury: Prospective comparison with 1.5T.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLower‑field 0.55 T MRI scanners with large‑bore design could offer patients more comfortable feeling and flexible position. With the advances in deep‑learning reconstruction and hardware optimization, 0.55T have greatly improved their image quality and cost‑effectiveness for musculoskeletal applications. However, its feasibility for shoulder evaluation remains unstudied. PURPOSE: To evaluate the image quality of shoulder using 0.55T MRI in volunteers and patients with rotator cuff injury with comparison of conventional 1.5T.
methodsFifty participants (25 volunteers, 25 patients) were prospectively enrolled. All participants underwent shoulder MRI both at open 0.55T with contour coils and deep learning (DL) and 1.5T MR without DL. The nonparametric method was utilized to compare image quality scores and quantitative metrics (signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (|CNR|)). Arthroscopy have been conducted in 16 patients. Kappa statistics was used to assess interobserver and interstudy agreement for lesion evaluation. Comfort feeling was also compared.
resultsThe scan time was 11'25″ for 0.55T MRI and 11'42″ for 1.5T MRI. The interobserver analyses showed high consistency (κ = 0.771-1.000, P: 0.008 ∼ < 0.001) among 3 readers. The scores for coronal fat suppressed T2 weighted imaging (fsT2WI) and coronal T1 weighted imaging (T1WI) were significantly higher for 0.55T MRI. Most sequences at 0.55T demonstrated significantly higher SNRs (P:0.04 ∼ < 0.001). Additionally, |CNR| values for lesions were significantly higher in fs proton weighted imaging (PDWI) and fsT2WI at 0.55T. Perfect interstudy agreement between 0.55T and 1.5T was observed between 2 readers (Kappa = 1, P < 0.001) for lesion assessment. Agreement between MRI findings and arthroscopic results was perfect or good. The 0.55T system received higher scores in comfort ratings.
conclusionThe 0.55T MRI with DL, showed comparable or better image quality in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury to 1.5T MRI without DL.
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.