Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 7.
Published in final edited form as: Magn Reson Med. 2019 Jul 1;82(5):1905–1919. doi: 10.1002/mrm.27852

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Clinical evaluation by four radiologists for the abdomen of the third experiment for all eight subjects. Top panels: Clinical interpretability scores were 0 (structure not identified), 1 (structure poorly visualized), and 2 (structure clearly visualized). Bottom left: Subjective impression score ranks how frequently the SRR (NiftyMIC a+c+s+3obl) was considered subjectively of worse, same or better quality than the original axial and coronal SST2W data for interpretation. Bottom right: Artifacts measure to what extent the SRR presented additional artifacts with respect to the original axial and coronal SST2W data with scores 0 (lots of new artifacts), 1 (minimal new artifacts), 2 (no new artifact), and 3 (less artifact than original). Stars are shown to illustrate significant outcomes by rejecting the respective H0 hypothesis based on a Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p < 0.05)