Vendor‐neutral sequences and fully transparent workflows improve inter‐vendor reproducibility of quantitative <scp>MRI</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We developed an end-to-end workflow that starts with a vendor-neutral acquisition and tested the hypothesis that vendor-neutral sequences decrease inter-vendor variability of T1, magnetization transfer ratio (MTR), and magnetization transfer saturation-index (MTsat) measurements. METHODS: We developed and deployed a vendor-neutral 3D spoiled gradient-echo (SPGR) sequence on three clinical scanners by two MRI vendors. We then acquired T1 maps on the ISMRM-NIST system phantom, as well as T1, MTR, and MTsat maps in three healthy participants. We performed hierarchical shift function analysis in vivo to characterize the differences between scanners when the vendor-neutral sequence is used instead of commercial vendor implementations. Inter-vendor deviations were compared for statistical significance to test the hypothesis. RESULTS: In the phantom, the vendor-neutral sequence reduced inter-vendor differences from 8% to 19.4% to 0.2% to 5% with an overall accuracy improvement, reducing ground truth T1 deviations from 7% to 11% to 0.2% to 4%. In vivo, we found that the variability between vendors is significantly reduced (p = 0.015) for all maps (T1, MTR, and MTsat) using the vendor-neutral sequence. CONCLUSION: We conclude that vendor-neutral workflows are feasible and compatible with clinical MRI scanners. The significant reduction of inter-vendor variability using vendor-neutral sequences has important implications for qMRI research and for the reliability of multicenter clinical trials.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".