The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of single‐shot localization methods (steam and press) for In vivo proton NMR spectroscopy
Abstract
Two single‐shot localization techniques, STEAM and PRESS, are analyzed with regard to specifications for in vivo localized proton NMR. In particular, attention is paid to optimum signal intensity per unit volume, sensitivity to motion and diffusion, shortest attainable echo time, water suppression and editing possibilities. Experimental results are shown for cat brain at 4.7 T and human brain at 1.5 T. Both STEAM and PRESS are highly effective localization methods. For long echo times, PRESS is the method of choice, because it offers a factor of two gain in signal intensity. In addition, the method is less sensitive to motion and diffusion, and not susceptible to multiple‐quantum effects. STEAM offers advantages for observation of (coupled) metabolites with short T2, because (a) shorter TEs can be attained and (b) effective water suppression sequences can be implemented without penalty in echo time. Differences relating to editing possibilities and B1 dependence, possibly important in choosing a method, are discussed.
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
Le Bihan, D., Breton, E., Lallemand, D., Grenier, P., Cabanis, E., & Laval-Jeantet, M. (1986) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.161.2.3763909 · Cited by 3,912
Cited by
Localized short‐echo‐time proton MR spectroscopy with full signal‐intensity acquisition
Mlynárik, V., Gambarota, G., Frenkel, H., & Gruetter, R. (2006) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.21043 · Cited by 274
Human brain: Proton diffusion MR spectroscopy
Posse, S., Cuenod, C. A., & Le Bihan, D. (1993) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.188.3.8351339 · Cited by 122
(1995) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.152.5.666 · Cited by 109
Small animal cardiovascular MR imaging and spectroscopy
Bakermans, A. J., Abdurrachim, D., Moonen, R. P. M., Motaal, A. G., Prompers, J. J., Strijkers, G. J., Vandoorne, K., & Nicolay, K. (2015) · Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy · doi:10.1016/j.pnmrs.2015.03.001 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Moonen, C. T. W., Kienlin, M. V., Van Zijl, P. C. M., Cohen, J., Gillen, J., Daly, P., & Wolf, G.
- Venue
- NMR in Biomedicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1989-12
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 201-208
- ISSN
- 0952-3480 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1492
- OpenAlex
- W2015536104
- Cited by
- 216
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.10
- 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: Comparison of single‐shot localization methods (steam and press) for In vivo proton NMR spectroscopy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/nbm.1940020506
- The paper
- Moonen, C. T. W., Kienlin, M. V., Van Zijl, P. C. M., Cohen, J., Gillen, J., Daly, P., & Wolf, G. (1989). Comparison of single‐shot localization methods (steam and press) for In vivo proton NMR spectroscopy. NMR in Biomedicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.1940020506
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.
