The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Steady‐state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented k‐space gradient‐echo imaging
Abstract
Steady‐state free precession imaging is a promising technique for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as it provides improved blood/myocardial contrast in shorter acquisition times compared with conventional gradient‐echo acquisition. The better contrast could improve observer agreement and automatic detection of cardiac contours for volumetric assessment of the ventricles, but measurements might differ from those obtained using conventional methods. We compared volumetric measurements, observer variabilities, and automatic contour detection between a steady‐state free precession imaging sequence (BFFE = balanced fast field echo) and segmented k‐space gradient‐echo acquisition (TFE = turbo field echo) in 41 subjects. With BFFE, significantly higher end‐diastolic and end‐systolic volumes and lower wall thickness, ventricular mass, ejection fraction, and wall motion were observed (P < 0.0001), while interobserver variabilities were lower and automatic contour detection of endocardial contours was more successful. We conclude that the improved image quality of BFFE reduces the observer‐dependence of volumetric measurements of the left ventricle (LV) but results in significantly different values in comparison to TFE measurements. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2001;14:230–236. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Valente, A. M., Cook, S., Festa, P., Ko, H. H., Krishnamurthy, R., Taylor, A. M., Warnes, C. A., Kreutzer, J., & Geva, T. (2014) · Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography · doi:10.1016/j.echo.2013.11.009 · Cited by 317
Burns, J., Sivananthan, M. U., Ball, S. G., Mackintosh, A. F., Mary, D. A. S. G., & Greenwood, J. P. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.668863 · Cited by 122
Self-citationKoskenvuo, J. W., Karra, H., Lehtinen, J., Niemi, P., Pärkkä, J., Knuuti, J., & Hartiala, J. J. (2007) · Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging · doi:10.1111/j.1475-097x.2007.00764.x · Cited by 28
Magnetic resonance imaging in myocardial ischemia.
Viswamitra, S., Higgins, C. B., Meacham, D. F., & Mehta, J. L. (2004) · Current Opinion in Cardiology · doi:10.1097/01.hco.0000133112.66486.1d · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Plein, S., Bloomer, T. N., Ridgway, J. P., Jones, T. R., Bainbridge, G. J., & Sivananthan, M. U.
- Venue
- Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-08-23
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 230-236
- ISSN
- 1053-1807 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2586
- OpenAlex
- W1995429372
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Steady‐state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented k‐space gradient‐echo imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jmri.1178
- The paper
- Plein, S., Bloomer, T. N., Ridgway, J. P., Jones, T. R., Bainbridge, G. J., & Sivananthan, M. U. (2001). Steady‐state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented k‐space gradient‐echo imaging. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1178
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.