Skip to main content
. 2021 Jun 30;16(6):e0252966. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252966

Table 5. ANOVA comparison for IR, VFA at 3 T.

T1,NMR (ms) Vendor– 3 T
IR VFA
C v. D C v. E D v. E C v. D C v. E D v. E
2033 0.9970 0.0056 0.0109 0.0119 0.9712 0.0061
1489 0.9980 0.0001 0.0001 0.0166 0.8883 0.0055
1012 0.4999 0.0056 0.0008 0.0106 0.8952 0.0036
731 0.6117 0.3649 0.0828 0.0037 0.9552 0.0017
514 0.7037 0.0646 0.0163 0.0012 0.9984 0.0008
368 0.9247 0.0299 0.0184 0.0007 0.9600 0.0003
260 0.5113 0.0201 0.2208 0.0031 0.7508 0.0006
185 0.0637 0.0628 0.9783 0.0271 0.5641 0.0031
133 0.3646 0.0401 0.5122 0.2006 0.3089 0.0123
93 0.1293 0.0001 0.0163 0.4240 0.1926 0.0199
65 0.8806 0.0178 0.0628 0.2636 0.3983 0.0251
46 0.9795 0.1217 0.2024 0.3201 0.6593 0.0741
32 0.8823 0.3176 0.1665 0.0505 0.8880 0.0180
23 0.8240 0.2355 0.6464 0.0064 0.9861 0.0037

p-value for ANOVA comparison with 95% confidence interval testing for IR, VFA differences between vendors at 3 T, considering each T1,NMR value individually.