Table 1.
Results of image quality scores
| MUSE-DWI > rFOV-DWI | MUSE-DWI = rFOV-DWI | MUSE-DWI < rFOV-DWI | Mean score of MUSE-DWI | Mean score of rFOV-DWI | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observer 1 (6 years of experience) | ||||||
| Artifacts | 21 | 30 | 7 | 3.48 ± 1.03 | 3.10 ± 0.87 | 0.002 |
| Noise | 7 | 38 | 13 | 3.38 ± 0.52 | 3.48 ± 0.54 | 0.18 |
| Sharpness | 23 | 28 | 7 | 3.98 ± 0.74 | 3.64 ± 0.81 | 0.002 |
| Lesion conspicuity | 20 | 33 | 5 | 4.24 ± 0.73 | 3.84 ± 0.79 | 0.001 |
| Overall quality | 20 | 31 | 7 | 3.78 ± 0.59 | 3.51 ± 0.60 | 0.009 |
| Observer 2 (10 years of experience) | ||||||
| Artifacts | 38 | 19 | 1 | 4.41 ± 0.73 | 3.60 ± 0.72 | < 0.0001 |
| Noise | 12 | 29 | 17 | 3.55 ± 0.50 | 3.64 ± 0.48 | 0.35 |
| Sharpness | 47 | 10 | 1 | 4.66 ± 0.58 | 3.67 ± 0.57 | < 0.0001 |
| Lesion conspicuity | 49 | 9 | 0 | 4.76 ± 0.43 | 3.78 ± 0.50 | < 0.0001 |
| Overall quality | 45 | 13 | 0 | 4.62 ± 0.52 | 3.67 ± 0.57 | < 0.0001 |
| Observer 3 (17 years of experience) | ||||||
| Artifacts | 23 | 24 | 11 | 3.59 ± 1.01 | 3.31 ± 0.86 | 0.018 |
| Noise | 15 | 29 | 14 | 3.33 ± 0.57 | 3.26 ± 0.71 | 0.53 |
| Sharpness | 36 | 22 | 0 | 3.64 ± 0.69 | 2.91 ± 0.66 | < 0.0001 |
| Lesion conspicuity | 35 | 16 | 7 | 4.33 ± 0.69 | 4.17 ± 0.57 | < 0.0001 |
| Overall quality | 30 | 22 | 6 | 3.64 ± 0.72 | 3.14 ± 0.80 | < 0.0001 |
MUSE-DWI = Multiplexed sensitivity encoding diffusion-weighted imaging, rFOV-DWI = reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging
p values in square brackets indicate the results of statistical comparison of scores between MUSE and rFOV-DWI, calculated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test