Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE‐MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials

Open access
Shukla‐Dave, Amita, Obuchowski, Nancy A., Chenevert, Thomas L., Jambawalikar, Sachin, Schwartz, Lawrence H., Malyarenko, Dariya, Huang, Wei, Noworolski, Susan M., Young, Robert J., Shiroishi, Mark S., Kim, Harrison, Coolens, Catherine, Laue, Hendrik, Chung, Caroline, Rosen, Mark, Boss, Michael, Jackson, Edward F.·2019·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Abstract

Physiological properties of tumors can be measured both in vivo and noninvasively by diffusion‐weighted imaging and dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Although these techniques have been used for more than two decades to study tumor diffusion, perfusion, and/or permeability, the methods and studies on how to reduce measurement error and bias in the derived imaging metrics is still lacking in the literature. This is of paramount importance because the objective is to translate these quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) into clinical trials, and ultimately in clinical practice. Standardization of the image acquisition using appropriate phantoms is the first step from a technical performance standpoint. The next step is to assess whether the imaging metrics have clinical value and meet the requirements for being a QIB as defined by the Radiological Society of North America's Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA). The goal and mission of QIBA and the National Cancer Institute Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN) initiatives are to provide technical performance standards (QIBA profiles) and QIN tools for producing reliable QIBs for use in the clinical imaging community. Some of QIBA's development of quantitative diffusion‐weighted imaging and dynamic contrast‐enhanced QIB profiles has been hampered by the lack of literature for repeatability and reproducibility of the derived QIBs. The available research on this topic is scant and is not in sync with improvements or upgrades in MRI technology over the years. This review focuses on the need for QIBs in oncology applications and emphasizes the importance of the assessment of their reproducibility and repeatability. Level of Evidence: 5 Technical Efficacy Stage: 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:e101–e121.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jmri.26518

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 100 references

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
Shukla‐Dave, A., Obuchowski, N. A., Chenevert, T. L., Jambawalikar, S., Schwartz, L. H., Malyarenko, D., Huang, W., Noworolski, S. M., Young, R. J., Shiroishi, M. S., Kim, H., Coolens, C., Laue, H., Chung, C., Rosen, M., Boss, M., & Jackson, E. F.
Venue
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-11-19
Volume
49
Issue
7
Pages
e101-e121
ISSN
  • 1053-1807 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-2586
OpenAlex
W2901253186
Cited by
389
References
100
FWCI
17.48
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: Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE‐MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jmri.26518
The paper
Shukla‐Dave, A., Obuchowski, N. A., Chenevert, T. L., Jambawalikar, S., Schwartz, L. H., Malyarenko, D., Huang, W., Noworolski, S. M., Young, R. J., Shiroishi, M. S., Kim, H., Coolens, C., Laue, H., Chung, C., Rosen, M., Boss, M., & Jackson, E. F. (2019). Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE‐MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26518

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.