Methodological consensus on clinical proton MRS of the brain: Review and recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proton MRS (1H MRS) provides noninvasive, quantitative metabolite profiles of tissue and has been shown to aid the clinical management of several brain diseases. Although most modern clinical MR scanners support MRS capabilities, routine use is largely restricted to specialized centers with good access to MR research support. Widespread adoption has been slow for several reasons, and technical challenges toward obtaining reliable good‐quality results have been identified as a contributing factor. Considerable progress has been made by the research community to address many of these challenges, and in this paper a consensus is presented on deficiencies in widely available MRS methodology and validated improvements that are currently in routine use at several clinical research institutions. In particular, the localization error for the PRESS localization sequence was found to be unacceptably high at 3 T, and use of the semi‐adiabatic localization by adiabatic selective refocusing sequence is a recommended solution. Incorporation of simulated metabolite basis sets into analysis routines is recommended for reliably capturing the full spectral detail available from short TE acquisitions. In addition, the importance of achieving a highly homogenous static magnetic field (B0) in the acquisition region is emphasized, and the limitations of current methods and hardware are discussed. Most recommendations require only software improvements, greatly enhancing the capabilities of clinical MRS on existing hardware. Implementation of these recommendations should strengthen current clinical applications and advance progress toward developing and validating new MRS biomarkers for clinical use.
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 | 0.016 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".