Table 3.

Clinical evaluation by two radiologists for abdomen averaged over all eight subjects for two separate experiments: A first experiment based on six input stacks (a+c+s+3obl), and a second experiment involving three source data combinations (a+c, a+c+s, and a+c+s+3obl) for the best performing method in the first experiment (NiftyMIC)

		Clarity of anatomical structures			Total Score Anatomical Clarity	Visible Motion	Radiologists’ Preference
		CBD	LHD	RHD
Exp. 1: a+c+s+3obl	Static SRR	1.25 ± 0.46	1.25 ± 0.46	1.25 ± 0.46	3.75 ± 1.16	1.25 ± 0.46	1.62 ± 0.52
	RG‐HT2W	1.50 ± 0.76	1.62 ± 0.52	1.62 ± 0.52	4.75 ± 1.58	1.25 ± 0.71	1.38 ± 0.52
	NiftyMIC	2.88 ± 0.35	2.62 ± 0.52	2.62 ± 0.52	8.12 ± 1.25*	2.25 ± 0.71*	3.00 ± 0.00*
Exp. 2: NiftyMIC	a+c	1.38 ± 0.52	1.12 ± 0.35	1.12 ± 0.35	3.62 ± 0.74	1.00 ± 0.00	1.12 ± 0.35
	a+c+s	1.75 ± 0.46	1.50 ± 0.53	1.50 ± 0.53	4.75 ± 0.89	1.38 ± 0.52	1.88 ± 0.35
	a+c+s+3obl	2.62 ± 0.52	2.50 ± 0.76	2.25 ± 0.71	7.38 ± 1.41*	2.12 ± 0.35	3.00 ± 0.00*

Notes: Clarity of anatomical structures score indicates how well common bile duct (CBD), and left and right hepatic ducts (LHD and RHD) are visualized in each image with ratings 0 (structure not seen), 1 (poor depiction), 2(suboptimal visualization; image not adequate for diagnostic purposes), 3 (clear visualization of structure but reduced tissue contrast; image-based diagnosis feasible) and 4 (excellent depiction; optimal for diagnostic purposes). Visible motion score rates the amount of visible non-corrected motion from score 0 (complete motion) to 3 (no motion). Radiologists’ preference ranks the subjectively preferred reconstructions from 1 to 3 (least to most preferred). Stars in the last three columns indicate that the respective score is statistically significantly different from the respective other two groups based on Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc Dunn tests (p < 0.05).