The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Methodological consensus on clinical proton MRS of the brain: Review and recommendations
Open accessAbstract
Proton MRS (1 H MRS) provides noninvasive, quantitative metabolite profiles of tissue and has been shown to aid the clinical management of several brain diseases. Although most modern clinical MR scanners support MRS capabilities, routine use is largely restricted to specialized centers with good access to MR research support. Widespread adoption has been slow for several reasons, and technical challenges toward obtaining reliable good‐quality results have been identified as a contributing factor. Considerable progress has been made by the research community to address many of these challenges, and in this paper a consensus is presented on deficiencies in widely available MRS methodology and validated improvements that are currently in routine use at several clinical research institutions. In particular, the localization error for the PRESS localization sequence was found to be unacceptably high at 3 T, and use of the semi‐adiabatic localization by adiabatic selective refocusing sequence is a recommended solution. Incorporation of simulated metabolite basis sets into analysis routines is recommended for reliably capturing the full spectral detail available from short TE acquisitions. In addition, the importance of achieving a highly homogenous static magnetic field (B 0) in the acquisition region is emphasized, and the limitations of current methods and hardware are discussed. Most recommendations require only software improvements, greatly enhancing the capabilities of clinical MRS on existing hardware. Implementation of these recommendations should strengthen current clinical applications and advance progress toward developing and validating new MRS biomarkers for clinical use.
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
MRI of the Neonatal Brain: A Review of Methodological Challenges and Neuroscientific Advances
Dubois, J., Alison, M., Counsell, S. J., Hertz‐Pannier, L., Hüppi, P. S., & Benders, M. J. N. L. (2021) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · doi:10.1002/jmri.27192 · Cited by 226
Kantrowitz, J. T., Dong, Z., Milak, M. S., Rashid, R., Kegeles, L. S., Javitt, D. C., Lieberman, J. A., & John Mann, J. (2021) · Translational Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41398-021-01541-1 · Cited by 100
Halliday, A. R., Vucic, S. N., Georges, B., LaRoche, M., Mendoza Pardo, M. A., Swiggard, L. O., McDonald, K., Olofsson, M., Menon, S. N., Francis, S. M., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1474003 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, M., Andronesi, O., Barker, P. B., Bartha, R., Bizzi, A., Bolan, P. J., Brindle, K. M., Choi, I., Cudalbu, C., Dydak, U., Emir, U. E., Gonzalez, R. G., Gruber, S., Gruetter, R., Gupta, R. K., Heerschap, A., Henning, A., Hetherington, H. P., Huppi, P. S., Hurd, R. E., Kantarci, K., Kauppinen, R. A., Klomp, D. W. J., Kreis, R., Kruiskamp, M. J., Leach, M. O., Lin, A. P., Luijten, P. R., Marjańska, M., Maudsley, A. A., Meyerhoff, D. J., Mountford, C. E., Mullins, P. G., Murdoch, J. B., Nelson, S. J., Noeske, R., Öz, G., Pan, J. W., Peet, A. C., Poptani, H., Posse, S., Ratai, E., Salibi, N., Scheenen, T. W. J., Smith, I. C. P., Soher, B. J., Tkáč, I., Vigneron, D. B., & Howe, F. A.
- Venue
- Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-03-28
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 527-550
- ISSN
- 0740-3194 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2594
- OpenAlex
- W2932841619
- Cited by
- 470
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.25
- 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: Methodological consensus on clinical proton MRS of the brain: Review and recommendations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mrm.27742
- The paper
- Wilson, M., Andronesi, O., Barker, P. B., Bartha, R., Bizzi, A., Bolan, P. J., Brindle, K. M., Choi, I., Cudalbu, C., Dydak, U., Emir, U. E., Gonzalez, R. G., Gruber, S., Gruetter, R., Gupta, R. K., Heerschap, A., Henning, A., Hetherington, H. P., Huppi, P. S., . . . Howe, F. A. (2019). Methodological consensus on clinical proton MRS of the brain: Review and recommendations. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27742
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.