Improving the sensitivity of spin‐echo fMRI at 3T by highly accelerated acquisitions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: -weighted GE sequences because of their superior sensitivity compared to SE-fMRI. The presented SE implementation of a highly accelerated GE pulse sequence therefore aims to improve the sensitivity of SE-fMRI while profiting from a reduction of susceptibility-induced signal dropout. METHODS: Spin-echo MR encephalography (SE-MREG) is compared with the more conventionally used spin-echo echo-planar imaging (SE-EPI) and spin-echo simultaneous multislice (SE-SMS) at 3T in terms of capability to detect neuronal activations and resting-state functional connectivity. For activation analysis, healthy subjects underwent consecutive SE-MREG (pulse repetition time [TR] = 0.25 seconds), SE-SMS (TR = 1.3 seconds), and SE-EPI (TR = 4.4 seconds) scans in pseudorandomized order applied to a visual block design paradigm for generation of t-statistics maps. For the investigation of functional connectivity, additional resting-state data were acquired for 5 minutes and a seed-based correlation analysis using Stanford's FIND (Functional Imaging in Neuropsychiatric Disorders) atlas was performed. RESULTS: The increased sampling rate of SE-MREG relative to SE-SMS and SE-EPI improves the sensitivity to detect BOLD activation by 33% and 54%, respectively, and increases the capability to extract resting-state networks. Compared with a brain region that is not affected by magnetic field inhomogeneities, SE-MREG shows 2.5 times higher relative signal strength than GE-MREG in mesial temporal structures. CONCLUSION: SE-MREG offers a viable possibility for whole-brain fMRI with consideration of brain regions that are affected by strong susceptibility-induced magnetic field gradients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".