Presenting quantitative data using non-standardized color maps potentially results in unrecognized misinterpretation of data. Clinically meaningful color maps should intuitively and inclusively represent data without misleading interpretation. Uniformity of the color gradient for color maps is critically important. Maximal color and lightness contrast, readability for color vision-impaired individuals, and recognizability of the color scheme are highly desirable features. This article describes the use of color maps in five key quantitative MRI techniques: relaxometry, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI, MR elastography (MRE), and water-fat MRI. Current display practice of color maps is reviewed and shortcomings against desirable features are highlighted. Evidence Level: 5. Technical Efficacy: Stage 2.

@en

Purpose
To harmonize the use of color for MR relaxometry maps and therefore recommend the use of specific color-maps for representing T1, T2, and T2* maps and their inverses.

Methods
Perceptually linearized color-maps were chosen to have similar color settings as those proposed by Griswold et al. in 2018. A Delphi process, polling the opinion of a panel of 81 experts, was used to generate consensus on the suitability of these maps.

Results
Consensus was reached on the suitability of the logarithm-processed Lipari color-map for T1 and the logarithm-processed Navia color-map for T2 and T2*. There was consensus on color bars being mandatory and on the use of a specific value indicating “invalidity.” There was no consensus on whether the ranges should be fixed per anatomy.

Conclusion
The authors recommend the use of the logarithm-processed Lipari color-map for displaying quantitative T1 maps and R1 maps; likewise, the authors recommend the logarithm-processed Navia color-map for displaying T2, T2*, R2, and R2* maps.

This work originated with the Quantitative MR Study Group of the International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM); it has the approval of the Publication Committee and of the Board of the ISMRM.@en

On behalf of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM) Quantitative MR Study Group, this article provides an overview of considerations for the development, validation, qualification, and dissemination of quantitative MR (qMR) methods. This process is framed in terms of two central technical performance properties, i.e., bias and precision. Although qMR is confounded by undesired effects, methods with low bias and high precision can be iteratively developed and validated. For illustration, two distinct qMR methods are discussed throughout the manuscript: quantification of liver proton-density fat fraction, and cardiac T₁. These examples demonstrate the expansion of qMR methods from research centers toward widespread clinical dissemination. The overall goal of this article is to provide trainees, researchers, and clinicians with essential guidelines for the development and validation of qMR methods, as well as an understanding of necessary steps and potential pitfalls for the dissemination of quantitative MR in research and in the clinic.

@en