Magnetization transfer explains most of the <i>T</i> ₁ variability in the MRI literature

The results suggest that a mono-exponential model does not adequately describe longitudinal relaxation in biological tissue. Therefore, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow> <mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {T}_1 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> in biological tissue should be considered only a semi-quantitative metric that is inherently contingent upon the imaging methodology, and comparisons between different <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow> <mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {T}_1 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -mapping methods and the use of simplistic spin systems-such as doped-water phantoms-for validation should be viewed with caution.