Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 544

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 396 of the 396 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pros and cons of ultra-high-field MRI/MRS for human application

Open access
Ladd, Mark E., Bachert, Peter, Meyerspeer, Martin, Moser, Ewald, Nagel, Armin M., Norris, David G., Schmitter, Sebastian, Speck, Oliver, Straub, Sina, Zaiss, Moritz·2018·Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopic techniques are widely used in humans both for clinical diagnostic applications and in basic research areas such as cognitive neuroimaging. In recent years, new human MR systems have become available operating at static magnetic fields of 7 T or higher (≥300 MHz proton frequency). Imaging human-sized objects at such high frequencies presents several challenges including non-uniform radiofrequency fields, enhanced susceptibility artifacts, and higher radiofrequency energy deposition in the tissue. On the other side of the scale are gains in signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio that allow finer structures to be visualized and smaller physiological effects to be detected. This review presents an overview of some of the latest methodological developments in human ultra-high field MRI/MRS as well as associated clinical and scientific applications. Emphasis is given to techniques that particularly benefit from the changing physical characteristics at high magnetic fields, including susceptibility-weighted imaging and phase-contrast techniques, imaging with X-nuclei, MR spectroscopy, CEST imaging, as well as functional MRI. In addition, more general methodological developments such as parallel transmission and motion correction will be discussed that are required to leverage the full potential of higher magnetic fields, and an overview of relevant physiological considerations of human high magnetic field exposure is provided.

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.pnmrs.2018.06.001

Cites

396 of 396 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 396 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ladd, M. E., Bachert, P., Meyerspeer, M., Moser, E., Nagel, A. M., Norris, D. G., Schmitter, S., Speck, O., Straub, S., & Zaiss, M.
Venue
Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-12
Volume
109
Pages
1-50
ISSN
0079-6565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2806074443
Cited by
544
References
396
FWCI
27.40
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: Pros and cons of ultra-high-field MRI/MRS for human application. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pnmrs.2018.06.001
The paper
Ladd, M. E., Bachert, P., Meyerspeer, M., Moser, E., Nagel, A. M., Norris, D. G., Schmitter, S., Speck, O., Straub, S., & Zaiss, M. (2018). Pros and cons of ultra-high-field MRI/MRS for human application. Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnmrs.2018.06.001

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.