Skip to main content
. 2019 Jun 10;82(5):1587–1603. doi: 10.1002/mrm.27822

Table 1.

Spectral fitting metrics (SNR, FWHM, and metabolite CRLBs) averaged over all five volunteers

SNR [a.u.] FWHM [Hz] tCr CRLB [%] tCho CRLB [%] tNAA CRLB [%]
iMUSICAL 21.3 ± 3.7 (21.8) 13.5 ± 2.4 (13.5) 3.7 ± 0.5 (4) 3.9 ± 0.4 (4) 2.1 ± 0.3 (2)
aMUSICAL static 19.6 ± 3.4 (19.4) 13.6 ± 2.5 (13.5) 3.8 ± 0.5 (4) 3.9 ± 0.4 (4) 2.2 ± 0.4 (2)
aMUSICAL moved 19.5 ± 3.3 (19.3) 13.6 ± 2.6 (13.6) 3.9 ± 0.6 (4) 3.9 ± 0.4 (4) 2.2 ± 0.4 (2)

Mean values with standard deviations and medians in brackets are provided. The best results were obtained using iMUSICAL. The differences between iMUSICAL and either of the two aMUSICAL tests were larger than among the two aMUSICAL approaches.

Abbreviations: CRLBs, Cramer‐Rao lower bounds; FWHM, full width at half maximum; SNR, signal‐to‐noise ratio; tCho, total choline; tCr, total creatine; TNAA, total N‐acetyl‐aspartate.