The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Image distortion correction in EPI: Comparison of field mapping with point spread function mapping
Open accessAbstract
Echo‐planar imaging (EPI) can provide rapid imaging by acquiring a complete k‐space data set in a single acquisition. However, this approach suffers from distortion effects in geometry and intensity, resulting in poor image quality. The distortions, caused primarily by field inhomogeneities, lead to intensity loss and voxel shifts, the latter of which are particularly severe in the phase‐encode direction. Two promising approaches to correct the distortion in EPI are field mapping and point spread function (PSF) mapping. The field mapping method measures the field distortions and translates these into voxel shifts, which can be used to assign image intensities to the correct voxel locations. The PSF approach uses acquisitions with additional phase‐encoding gradients applied in the x, y, and/or z directions to map the 1D, 2D, or 3D PSF of each voxel. These PSFs encode the spatial information about the distortion and the overall distribution of intensities from a single voxel. The measured image is the convolution of the undistorted density and the PSF. Measuring the PSF allows the distortion in geometry and intensity to be corrected. This work compares the efficacy of these methods with equal time allowed for field mapping and PSF mapping. Magn Reson Med 48:137–146, 2002. © 2002 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
Cited by
Comparing face patch systems in macaques and humans
Tsao, D. Y., Moeller, S., & Freiwald, W. A. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0809662105 · Cited by 659
Zaitsev, M., Hennig, J., & Speck, O. (2004) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.20261 · Cited by 349
Adachi, Y., Osada, T., Sporns, O., Watanabe, T., Matsui, T., Miyamoto, K., & Miyashita, Y. (2012) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr234 · Cited by 211
Neurobiology of culturally common maternal responses to infant cry
Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., Rigo, P., Esposito, G., Swain, J. E., Suwalsky, J. T. D., Su, X., Du, X., Zhang, K., Cote, L. R., et al. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1712022114 · Cited by 168
Species-specific response to human infant faces in the premotor cortex
Caria, A., de Falco, S., Venuti, P., Lee, S., Esposito, G., Rigo, P., Birbaumer, N., & Bornstein, M. H. (2012) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.12.068 · Cited by 135
Metadata
- Authors
- Zeng, H., & Constable, R. T.
- Venue
- Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-06-27
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 137-146
- ISSN
- 0740-3194 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2594
- OpenAlex
- W2133455575
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.60
- 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: Image distortion correction in EPI: Comparison of field mapping with point spread function mapping. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mrm.10200
- The paper
- Zeng, H., & Constable, R. T. (2002). Image distortion correction in EPI: Comparison of field mapping with point spread function mapping. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.10200
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.