ArticlePloS one2023
Evaluation of calculation processes of apparent diffusion coefficient subtraction method (ASM) imaging.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A number of restricted diffusion (RD) imaging techniques, such as diffusion kurtosis (DK) imaging and Q space imaging, have been developed and proven to be useful for the diagnosis of diseases, including cerebral gliomas and cerebrovascular infarction. In particular, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) subtraction method (ASM) imaging has become available recently as a novel RD imaging technique. ASM is based on the difference between the ADC values in an image pair of two ADC maps, ADC basic (ADCb) and ADC modify (ADCm), which are created from diffusion-weighted images taken using short and long effective diffusion times, respectively. The present study aimed to assess the potential of different types of ASM imaging by comparing them with DK imaging which is the gold-standard RD imaging technique. In the present basic study using both polyethylene glycol phantom and cell-containing bio-phantom, three different types of ASM images were created using different calculation processes. ASM/A is an image calculated by dividing the absolute difference between ADCb and ADCm by ADCb several times. By contrast, ASM/S is an image created by dividing the absolute difference between ADCb and ADCm by the standard deviation of ADCb several times. As for positive ASM/A image (PASM/A), the positive image, which was resultant after subtracting ADCb from ADCm, was divided by ADCb several times. A comparison was made between the types of ASM and DK images. The results showed the same tendency between ASM/A in addition to both ASM/S and PASM/A. By increasing the number of divisions by ADCb from three to five times, ASM/A images transformed from DK-mimicking to more RD-sensitive images compared with DK images. These observations suggest that ASM/A images may prove useful for future clinical applications in RD imaging protocols for the diagnosis of diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.