Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition
9 May 2026 – 14 May 2026 · Cape Town, South Africa
569-05-012 ISMRM Abstract

Can AI Assess MRS Data Quality from Single Transients?

Primary: Contrast Mechanisms - Spectroscopy
Secondary: Acquisition & Reconstruction - AI methods
569-05-012 · Spectroscopy and Spectroscopic Imaging: Methods · Wednesday, 13 May, 4:00 PM–4:55 PM · Digital Posters Row J
Keywords: Spectroscopy Deep learning MRS Quality Assessment
Accepted
Shuyuan Wang1,2, Aaron Gudmundson3, Christopher W Davies-Jenkins 1, Yulu Song1, Georg Oeltzschner1, Richard AE Edden1
1The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States of America
2Department of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
3The Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
Presenting Author: Christopher W Davies-Jenkins

Synopsis

Motivation:
Goals:
Approach:
Results:
Full abstract & presentation

The full text, figures, and any recorded presentation for this abstract are not shown here. Log in if you are a member or registered attendee with access.

Full abstracts, figures, and presentations for Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition are available to registered attendees. This content becomes freely available to the public roughly two years after the meeting.

To request or purchase access, contact the ISMRM Central Office at info@ismrm.org.

Log in

References

1. Graaf RA de. In Vivo NMR Spectroscopy: Principles and Techniques. John Wiley & Sons; 2019.
2. Juchem C, Cudalbu C, De Graaf RA, et al. B0 shimming for in vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy: Experts’ consensus recommendations. NMR Biomed. 2021;34(5):e4350. doi:10.1002/nbm.4350 [doi]
3. Wilson M, Andronesi O, Barker PB, et al. Methodological consensus on clinical proton MRS of the brain: Review and recommendations. Magn Reson Med. 2019;82(2):527-550. doi:10.1002/mrm.27742 [doi]
4. Gudmundson AT, Davies-Jenkins CW, Özdemir İ, et al. Application of a 1H brain MRS benchmark dataset to deep learning for out-of-voxel artifacts. Imaging Neurosci. 2023;1:1-15. doi:10.1162/imag_a_00025 [doi]
5. Van De Sande DMJ, Merkofer JP, Amirrajab S, et al. A review of machine learning applications for the proton MR spectroscopy workflow. Magn Reson Med. 2023;90(4):1253-1270. doi:10.1002/mrm.29793 [doi]
6. Tapper S, Mikkelsen M, Dewey BE, et al. Frequency and phase correction of J-difference edited MR spectra using deep learning. Magn Reson Med. 2021;85(4):1755-1765. doi:10.1002/mrm.28525 [doi]
7. Gurbani SS, Schreibmann E, Maudsley AA, et al. A convolutional neural network to filter artifacts in spectroscopic MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2018;80(5):1765-1775. doi:10.1002/mrm.27166 [doi]
8. Vaziri S, Liu H, Xie E, et al. Evaluation of deep learning models for quality control of MR spectra. Front Neurosci. 2023;17:1219343. doi:10.3389/fnins.2023.1219343 [doi]
9. Peterson P, Trinh L, Månsson S. Quantitative1 H MRI and MRS of fatty acid composition. Magn Reson Med. 2021;85(1):49-67. doi:10.1002/mrm.28471 [doi]
10. Van De Sande DMJ, Gudmundson AT, Murali‐Manohar S, et al. A Digital Phantom for MR Spectroscopy Data Simulation. Magn Reson Med. October 2025:mrm.70138. doi:10.1002/mrm.70138 [doi]
11. Kingma DP, Ba J. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. January 2017. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980 [doi]
12. Oeltzschner G, Zöllner HJ, Hui SCN, et al. Osprey: Open-source processing, reconstruction & estimation of magnetic resonance spectroscopy data. J Neurosci Methods. 2020;343:108827. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.108827 [doi]

Cite this abstract

http://echo.ismrm.org/p/ISMRM2026/569-05-012