The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Neuroimaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: Comparison of oxygenation‐sensitive magnetic resonance imaging
Abstract
Noise properties, the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR), and signal responses were compared during functional activation of the human brain at 1.5 and 3.0 T. At the higher field spiral gradient‐echo (GRE) brain images revealed an average gain in SNR of 1.7 in fully relaxed and 2.2 in images with a repetition time (TR) of 1.5 sec. The tempered gain at longer TRs reflects the fact that the physiological noise depends on the signal strength and becomes a larger fraction of the total noise at 3.0 T. Activation of the primary motor and visual cortex resulted in a 36% and 44% increase of “activated pixels” at 3.0 T, which reflects a greater sensitivity for the detection of activated gray matter at the higher field. The gain in the CNR exhibited a dependency on the underlying tissue, i.e., an increase of 1.8× in regions of particular high activation‐induced signal changes (presumably venous vessels) and of 2.2× in the average activated areas. These results demonstrate that 3.0 T provides a clear advantage over 1.5 T for neuroimaging of homogeneous brain tissue, although stronger physiological noise contributions, more complicated signal features in the proximity of strong susceptibility gradients, and changes in the intrinsic relaxation times may mediate the enhancement. Magn Reson Med 45:595–604, 2001. © 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
Diffusion tensor MR imaging of the human brain
Pierpaoli, C., Jezzard, P., Basser, P. J., Barnett, A., & Di Chiro, G. (1996) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.201.3.8939209 · Cited by 2,664
Cited by
Determining the longitudinal relaxation time (T1) of blood at 3.0 Tesla
Lu, H., Clingman, C., Golay, X., & van Zijl, P. C. M. (2004) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.20178 · Cited by 685
Wise, R. G., Ide, K., Poulin, M. J., & Tracey, I. (2004) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.11.025 · Cited by 664
Triantafyllou, C., Hoge, R. D., Krueger, G., Wiggins, C. J., Potthast, A., Wiggins, G. C., & Wald, L. L. (2005) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.007 · Cited by 648
Physiological noise in oxygenation‐sensitive magnetic resonance imaging
Krüger, G., & Glover, G. H. (2001) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1240 · Cited by 629
Self-citationSpiral‐in/out BOLD fMRI for increased SNR and reduced susceptibility artifacts
Glover, G. H., & Law, C. S. (2001) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1222 · Cited by 599
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Krüger, G., Kastrup, A., & Glover, G. H.
- Venue
- Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-03-27
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 595-604
- ISSN
- 0740-3194 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2594
- OpenAlex
- W2130272160
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.74
- 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: Neuroimaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: Comparison of oxygenation‐sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mrm.1081
- The paper
- Krüger, G., Kastrup, A., & Glover, G. H. (2001). Neuroimaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: Comparison of oxygenation‐sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1081
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.