Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reliable quantification of BOLD fMRI cerebrovascular reactivity despite poor breath-hold performance

Open access
Bright, Molly G., Murphy, Kevin·2013·NeuroImage

Abstract

Cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) can be mapped using BOLD fMRI to provide a clinical insight into vascular health that can be used to diagnose cerebrovascular disease. Breath-holds are a readily accessible method for producing the required arterial CO2 increases but their implementation into clinical studies is limited by concerns that patients will demonstrate highly variable performance of breath-hold challenges. This study assesses the repeatability of CVR measurements despite poor task performance, to determine if and how robust results could be achieved with breath-holds in patients. Twelve healthy volunteers were scanned at 3 T. Six functional scans were acquired, each consisting of 6 breath-hold challenges (10, 15, or 20 s duration) interleaved with periods of paced breathing. These scans simulated the varying breath-hold consistency and ability levels that may occur in patient data. Uniform ramps, time-scaled ramps, and end-tidal CO2 data were used as regressors in a general linear model in order to measure CVR at the grey matter, regional, and voxelwise level. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) quantified the repeatability of the CVR measurement for each breath-hold regressor type and scale of interest across the variable task performances. The ramp regressors did not fully account for variability in breath-hold performance and did not achieve acceptable repeatability (ICC<0.4) in several regions analysed. In contrast, the end-tidal CO2 regressors resulted in "excellent" repeatability (ICC=0.82) in the average grey matter data, and resulted in acceptable repeatability in all smaller regions tested (ICC>0.4). Further analysis of intra-subject CVR variability across the brain (ICCspatial and voxelwise correlation) supported the use of end-tidal CO2 data to extract robust whole-brain CVR maps, despite variability in breath-hold performance. We conclude that the incorporation of end-tidal CO2 monitoring into scanning enables robust, repeatable measurement of CVR that makes breath-hold challenges suitable for routine clinical practice.

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 · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.007

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Metadata

Authors
Bright, M. G., & Murphy, K.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-12
Volume
83
Pages
559-568
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058709849
Cited by
182
References
5
FWCI
6.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Reliable quantification of BOLD fMRI cerebrovascular reactivity despite poor breath-hold performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.007
The paper
Bright, M. G., & Murphy, K. (2013). Reliable quantification of BOLD fMRI cerebrovascular reactivity despite poor breath-hold performance. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.007

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.