Multivendor implementation and comparison of volumetric whole‐brain echo‐planar MR spectroscopic imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess volumetric proton MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) of the human brain on multivendor MRI instruments. METHODS: Echo-planar spectroscopic imaging was developed on instruments from three manufacturers, with matched specifications and acquisition protocols that accounted for differences in sampling performance, radiofrequency (RF) power, and data formats. Intersite reproducibility was evaluated for signal-normalized maps of N-acetylaspartate (NAA), creatine (Cre), and choline using phantom and human subject measurements. Comparative analyses included metrics for spectral quality, spatial coverage, and mean values in atlas-registered brain regions. RESULTS: Intersite differences for phantom measurements were less than 1.7% for individual metabolites and less than 0.2% for ratio measurements. Spatial uniformity ranged from 79% to 91%. The human studies found differences of mean values in the temporal lobe, but good agreement in other white matter regions, with maximum differences relative to their mean of under 3.2%. For NAA/Cre, the maximum difference was 1.8%. In gray matter, a significant difference was observed for frontal lobe NAA. Primary causes of intersite differences were attributed to shim quality, B0 drift, and accuracy of RF excitation. Correlation coefficients for measurements at each site were over 0.60, indicating good reliability. CONCLUSION: A volumetric intensity-normalized MRSI acquisition can be implemented in a comparable manner across multivendor MR instruments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".