Table 2.
Imaging Parameters and Number of Participants Varied Across Scanner Sites
| Institution | Scanner | Tesla | Sequence | Patients | Controls |
| Duke/UNC | GE Nvi Lx | 4.0T | Spiral | 9 | 11 |
| Brigham and Women's Hospital | GE | 3.0T | EPI | 4 | 5 |
| Massachusetts General Hospital | Siemens Trio | 3.0T | EPI | 5 | 0 |
| University of California—Los Angeles | Siemens Allegra | 3.0T | EPI | 7 | 10 |
| University of California—Irvine | Marconi Eclipse | 1.5T | EPI | 6 | 9 |
| University of New Mexico | Siemens Trio | 1.5T | EPI | 13 | 13 |
| University of Iowa | Siemens Trio | 3.0T | EPI | 8 | 10 |
| University of Minnesota | Siemens Trio | 3.0T | EPI | 14 | 13 |
Most scanners utilized an echo-planar imaging sequence for their functional magnetic resonance imaging blood–oxygen–level–dependent sequences with the exception of Duke/UNC.