Low-field MRI for use in neurological diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review recent clinical uses of low-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to guide incorporation into neurological practice. RECENT FINDINGS: Use of low-field MRI has been demonstrated in applications including tumours, vascular pathologies, multiple sclerosis, brain injury, and paediatrics. Safety, workflow, and image quality have also been evaluated. SUMMARY: Low-field MRI has the potential to increase access to critical brain imaging for patients who otherwise may not obtain imaging in a timely manner. This includes areas such as the intensive care unit and emergency room, where patients could be imaged at the point of care rather than be transported to the MRI scanner. Such systems are often more affordable than conventional systems, allowing them to be more easily deployed in resource constrained settings. A variety of systems are available on the market or in a research setting and are currently being used to determine clinical uses for these devices. The utility of such devices must be fully evaluated in clinical scenarios before adoption into standard practice can be achieved. This review summarizes recent clinical uses of low-field MR as well as safety, workflows, and image quality to aid practitioners in assessing this new technology.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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".