ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2019
Cardiac- versus diaphragm-based respiratory navigation for proton spectroscopy of the heart.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolite-cycled echo-planar spectroscopic imaging of the human heart.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
- Quantification of Myocardial Creatine and Triglyceride Content in the Human Heart: Precision and Accuracy of in vivo Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2021Article
- Comparison of single-voxelJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2021Article
- Motion correction methods for MRS: experts' consensus recommendations.NMR in biomedicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo study inter-individual differences of the relation between diaphragm and heart motion, the objective of the present study was to implement respiratory navigation on the heart and compare it against the established method of navigator gating on the diaphragm for single-voxel cardiac MATERIALS AND
methods
resultsWater phase and amplitude fluctuations for cardiac versus diaphragm navigation did not reveal significant differences. Both navigator positions provided comparable triglyceride-to-water ratios and gating efficiencies (coefficient of variation (CoV) 7.0%). The cardiac navigator showed a good reproducibility (CoV 5.2%). DISCUSSION: Respiratory navigation on the heart does not convey an advantage over diaphragm-based navigator gating for cardiac
Indexed as
Identifiers
30377860What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.