MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411010217 · doi:10.1016/j.mri.2025.110445

Comparing single-shot EPI and 2D-navigated, multi-shot EPI diffusion tensor imaging acquisitions in the lumbar spinal cord at 3T

2025· article· en· W4411010217 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alicia E. Cronin, Anna Combes, Lipika Narisetti, Grace Sweeney, Logan Prock, Delaney Houston, Caroline Seehorn, Kurt G. Schilling, Ryan K. Robison, Seth A. Smith, Kristin P. O’Grady

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringVanderbilt UniversitySociety for Anthropological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsSingle shotShot (pellet)Diffusion MRISpinal cordLumbarMedicineAnatomyMaterials scienceRadiologyPhysicsMagnetic resonance imagingOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) can provide insights into spinal cord microstructure in health and disease; however, its application has been largely limited to cervical spinal segments using single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) diffusion-weighted MRI acquisitions. In this work, we evaluate a multi-shot EPI diffusion-weighted acquisition with reduced field-of-view (FOV) and 2D-navigated motion correction applied in the lumbar spinal cord of healthy volunteers, and compare image quality, geometric distortions, and quantitative DTI indices to those obtained with conventional, single-shot EPI diffusion-weighted MRI in a distinct, age/sex-matched healthy cohort. At 3 Tesla, 25 and 27 healthy participants were imaged using the single-shot and multi-shot EPI readouts with diffusion weighting, respectively, with matching resolution and comparable scan time. Seven participants underwent both diffusion acquisitions and were included in both cohorts. DTI indices were compared between the multi-shot and single-shot cohorts. Image signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between gray and white matter, geometric distortions, and within-subject bias between the acquisitions were also assessed. The lumbar spinal cord diffusion indices derived from both cohorts were comparable to those in previous studies using single-shot EPI, though within-subject analysis demonstrated a systematic bias between the acquisitions in gray and white matter DTI measures, indicating these acquisitions are not interchangeable within a study. The multi-shot quantitative DTI maps demonstrated a significant reduction in image artifacts (i.e., distortions and blurring) and higher SNR and CNR compared to single-shot images. Overall, the reduced FOV, 2D-navigated, motion-corrected multi-shot acquisition demonstrated improved DTI quality metrics compared to single-shot, supporting its application for the lumbar spinal cord region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207