Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 28;88(2):663–675. doi: 10.1002/mrm.29229

FIGURE 5.

MRM-29229-FIG-0005-c

Results from qualitative assessment in 10 patients, scored by three expert readers. A–C, Distribution of image quality scores shown as a percentage of total number of slices over all patients. E–G, Distribution of perceived SNR scores shown as a percentage of total number of patients. D,H, Boxplots showing the distribution of average image quality scores (D) and perceived SNR scores (H) for 10 patients as assessed by three expert readers. There was no significant difference between the nine‐slice SMS sequence and three‐slice conventional sequence in terms of average image quality scores (p = 0.8) or average perceived SNR scores (p = 0.3)