Table 1.

This table summarizes the scans collected from the 17 subjects in this study

				SPGR/FLASH		MP-RAGE		SYNTH-T1		IR-SPGR		B0-corrected MEDIC
ID	Site	Gender	Age	PA	BC	PA	BC	PA	BC	PA	BC	PA	BC
1	1	Female	71.3	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
2	1	Female	76.9	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
3	1	Female	63.9	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
4	1	Female	73.0	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
5	1	Female	72.8	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
6	1	Female	66.9	X	X	X	X	X	X			X	X
7	1	Male	66.6	X		X		X	X
8	2	Female	79.6	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
9	2	Female	85.7	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
10	2	Female	62.1	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
11	2	Female	76.7	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
12	2	Male	64.5	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
13	2	Male	66.2	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
14	2	Female	77.8	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
15	2	Female	65.1	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
16	2	Male	59.6	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X
17	2	Male	80.0	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X

Sites 1 and 2 indicate UCSD and the Mayo Clinic respectively. Note that a Siemens scanner was used at UCSD and a GE scanner was used at Mayo. Therefore, the set of imaging sequences acquired was not identical between the two sites. The major differences were: IR-SPGR was only acquired at Mayo and the MEDIC scans were only acquired at UCSD. The specific scan types acquired for each subject are marked with an “X”. To rank the relative stability of two scan types, we only included subjects with both scan types acquired (for example, when evaluating the effect of B0-correction, only subjects 1–6 from site 1 were analyzed).