The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: To evaluate the validity of different approaches to determine the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) in MRI experiments with multi‐element surface coils, parallel imaging, and different reconstruction filters. Materials and Methods: Four different approaches of SNR calculation were compared in phantom measurements and in vivo based on: 1) the pixel‐by‐pixel standard deviation (SD) in multiple repeated acquisitions; 2) the signal statistics in a difference image; and 3) and 4) the statistics in two separate regions of a single image employing either the mean value or the SD of background noise. Different receiver coil systems (with one and eight channels), acquisitions with and without parallel imaging, and five different reconstruction filters were compared. Results: Averaged over all phantom measurements, the deviations from the reference value provided by the multiple‐acquisitions method are 2.7% (SD 1.6%) for the difference method, 37.7% (25.9%) for the evaluation of the mean value of background noise, and 34.0% (38.1%) for the evaluation of the SD of background noise. Conclusion: The conventionally determined SNR based on separate signal and noise regions in a single image will in general not agree with the true SNR measured in images after the application of certain reconstruction filters, multichannel reconstruction, or parallel imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007. © 2007 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
(1965) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(65)91037-8 · Cited by 16,856
SENSE: Sensitivity encoding for fast MRI
Pruessmann, K. P., Weiger, M., Scheidegger, M. B., & Boesiger, P. (1999) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1522-2594(199911)42:5<952::aid-mrm16>3.0.co;2-s · Cited by 6,251
Mathematical Analysis of Random Noise
Rice, S. O. (1944) · Bell System Technical Journal · doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1944.tb00874.x · Cited by 5,480
Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA)
Griswold, M. A., Jakob, P. M., Heidemann, R. M., Nittka, M., Jellus, V., Wang, J., Kiefer, B., & Haase, A. (2002) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.10171 · Cited by 5,303
The rician distribution of noisy mri data
Gudbjartsson, H., & Patz, S. (1995) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1910340618 · Cited by 2,494
Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)91748-9 · Cited by 2,343
Roemer, P. B., Edelstein, W. A., Hayes, C. E., Souza, S. P., & Mueller, O. M. (1990) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1910160203 · Cited by 2,322
Simultaneous acquisition of spatial harmonics (SMASH): Fast imaging with radiofrequency coil arrays
Sodickson, D. K., & Manning, W. J. (1997) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1910380414 · Cited by 2,142
Measurement of signal intensities in the presence of noise in MR images
Henkelman, R. M. (1985) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.595711 · Cited by 1,017
Cited by
Jeurissen, B., Leemans, A., Tournier, J., Jones, D. K., & Sijbers, J. (2013) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.22099 · Cited by 1,088
MRIQC: Advancing the automatic prediction of image quality in MRI from unseen sites
Esteban, O., Birman, D., Schaer, M., Koyejo, O. O., Poldrack, R. A., & Gorgolewski, K. J. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0184661 · Cited by 920
Diffusion MRI noise mapping using random matrix theory
Veraart, J., Fieremans, E., & Novikov, D. S. (2016) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.26059 · Cited by 773
Fast track to the neocortex: A memory engram in the posterior parietal cortex
Brodt, S., Gais, S., Beck, J., Erb, M., Scheffler, K., & Schönauer, M. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aau2528 · Cited by 224
Test-retest reproducibility of the default-mode network in healthy individuals
Meindl, T., Teipel, S., Elmouden, R., Mueller, S., Koch, W., Dietrich, O., Coates, U., Reiser, M., & Glaser, C. (2010) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.20860 · Cited by 220
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dietrich, O., Raya, J. G., Reeder, S. B., Reiser, M. F., & Schoenberg, S. O.
- Venue
- Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-07-10
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 375-385
- ISSN
- 1053-1807 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2586
- OpenAlex
- W2131752914
- Cited by
- 992
- References
- 23
- FWCI
- 18.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jmri.20969
- The paper
- Dietrich, O., Raya, J. G., Reeder, S. B., Reiser, M. F., & Schoenberg, S. O. (2007). Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20969
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.
