Magnetic resonance imaging for idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: A review of the scientific literature
https://doi.org/10.64265/3033-649X-2026.2.1.12-23
Abstract
Among elderly patients, normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is a socially significant and as yet unresolved problem in modern medicine. Its diagnosis is signifi cantly complicated by the similarity of its clinical manifestations to those of neurodegenerative and vascular diseases (vascular dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, progressive supranuclear palsy).
The aim. To present the neuroradiological markers commonly associated with normal pressure hydrocephalus, as well as the current radiological scale for assessing the probability of NPH (Radscale), its advantages, and disadvantages. This scale allows for the standardization of the assessment of radiological signs when NPH is suspected and can be used as a diagnostic screening tool.
About the Authors
O. B. Bogomyakova
The Institute International Tomography Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga B. Bogomyakova – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Radiologist, Research Officer
Institutskaya str., 3A, Novosibirsk, 630090
Pirogova str., 1, Novosibirsk, 630090
Yu. A. Stankevich
The Institute International Tomography Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yuliya A. Stankevich – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Radiologist, Senior Research Officer
Institutskaya str., 3A, Novosibirsk, 630090
Pirogova str., 1, Novosibirsk, 630090
A. A. Tulupov
The Institute International Tomography Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Andrey A. Tulupov – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Corresponding Member of the RAS, Chief Research Officer; Deputy Head of the Center for Postgraduate Medical Education
Institutskaya str., 3A, Novosibirsk, 630090
Pirogova str., 1, Novosibirsk, 630090
References
1. Agarwal A, Bathla G, Kanekar S. Imaging of communicating hydrocephalus. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2016; 37(2): 100-108. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2016.02.007
2. Solanki K, Singh J, Gupta T. Role of MRI in evaluation of hydrocephalus. Eur Chem Bull. 2023; 12: 1175-1183.
3. Bouzerar R, Ambarki K, Balédent O, Kongolo G, Picot JC, Meyer ME. Ventricular dilation as an instability of intracranial dynamics. Physical Rewiew E. 2005; 72(5 Pt 1):051912. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.051912
4. Martín-Láez R, Caballero-Arzapalo H, López-Menéndez LÁ, Arango-Lasprilla JC, Vázquez-Barquero A. Epidemiology of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: A systematic review of the literature. World Neurosurg. 2015; 84(6): 2002-2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.07.005
5. Grahnke K, Jusue-Torres I, Szujewski C, Joyce C, Schneck M, Prabhu VC, et al. The quest for predicting sustained shunt response in normal-pressure hydrocephalus: An analysis of the callosal angle’s utility. World Neurosurg. 2018; 115: e717-e722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.04.150
6. Klassen BT, Ahlskog JE. Normal pressure hydrocephalus: How often does the diagnosis hold water? Neurology. 2011; 77(12): 1119-1125. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31822f02f5
7. Lemcke J, Stengel D, Stockhammer F, Güthoff C, Rohde V, Meier U. Nationwide incidence of normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) assessed by insurance claim data in Germany. Open Neurol J. 2016; 10: 15-24. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874205X01610010015
8. Das JM, Biagioni MC. Normal pressure hydrocephalus. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025.
9. Williams H. A unifying hypothesis for hydrocephalus and the Chiari malformations part two: The hydrocephalus fi lling mechanism. Med Hypotheses. 2016; 94: 30-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2016.06.013
10. Oliveira LM, Nitrini R, Román GC. Normal-pressure hydrocephalus: A critical review. Dement Neuropsychol. 2019; 13(2): 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-020001
11. Nikaido Y, Urakami H, Akisue T, Okada Y, Katsuta N, Kawami Y, et al. Associations among falls, gait variability, and balance function in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019; 183: 105385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105385
12. Yamada S, Mase M. Cerebrospinal fl uid production and absorption and ventricular enlargement mechanisms in hydrocephalus. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2023; 63(4): 141-151. https://doi.org/10.2176/jns-nmc.2022-0331
13. Hakim S, Venegas JG, Burton JD. The physics of the cranial cavity, hydrocephalus and normal pressure hydrocephalus: Mechanical interpretation and mathematical model. Surg Neurol. 1976; 5(3): 187-210.
14. Bradley WG. Normal pressure hydrocephalus: New concepts on etiology and diagnosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2000; 21(9): 1586-1590.
15. Nakajima M, Yamada S, Miyajima M, Ishii K, Kuriyama N, Kazui H, et al.; Research Committee of Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus. Guidelines for management of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (Third Edition): Endorsed by the Japanese Society of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2021; 61(2): 63-97. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.st.2020-0292
16. Greenberg ABW, Mehta NH, Mekbib KY, Kiziltug E, Smith HR, Hyman BT, et al. Cases of familial idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus implicate genetic factors in disease pathogenesis. Cereb Cortex. 2023; 33(23): 11400-11407. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhad374
17. Relkin NR. Is normal pressure hydrocephalus a complex genetic disorder? Neurology. 2024; 103(5): e209784. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000209784
18. Ghosh S, Lippa C. Diagnosis and prognosis in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2014; 29(7): 583-589. https://doi.org/10.1177/1533317514523485
19. Bradley WG Jr. Magnetic resonance imaging of normal pressure hydrocephalus. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2016; 37(2): 120-128. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2016.01.005
20. Keong NC, Pena A, Price SJ, Czosnyka M, Czosnyka Z, Pickard JD. Imaging normal pressure hydrocephalus: Theories, techniques, and challenges. Neurosurg Focus. 2016; 41(3): E11. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.7.FOCUS16194
21. Yin LK, Zheng JJ, Zhao L, Hao XZ, Zhang XX, Tian JQ, et al. Reversed aqueductal cerebrospinal fl uid net fl ow in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurol Scand. 2017; 136(5): 434-439. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12750
22. Andersson J, Rosell M, Kockum K, Söderström L, Laurell K. Challenges in diagnosing normal pressure hydrocephalus: Evaluation of the diagnostic guidelines. eNeurological Sci. 2017; 7: 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2017.04.002
23. Lobzin VYu, Alizade MR, Lapina AV, Lobzin SV, Kolmakova KA, Gavrilov GV, et al. Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus and Alzheimer’s disease in clinical practice: comorbidity and diff erentiation. Medical Alphabet. 2020; (22): 36-43. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-202022-36-43
24. Tipton PW, Elder BD, Cogswell PM, Graff -Radford N. Normal pressure hydrocephalus, or Hakim syndrome: Review and update. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2024; 58(1): 8-20. https://doi.org/10.5603/pjnns.97343
25. Krotenkova MV, Kremneva EI, Akhmetzyanov BM, Dobrynina LA. Venous blood fl ow changes in age-related cerebral small vessel disease as assessed by MRI. REJR. 2020; 10(2): 61-70. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.21569/2222-7415-2020-10-2-61-70
26. Mendelevich EG. Normal pressure hydrocephalus and cerebral amyloid angiopathy: A set of diseases or the unity of pathogenesis? Neurology, Neuropsychiatry, Psychosomatics. 2020; 12(6): 104-109. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.14412/2074-2711-20206-104-109
27. Gavrilov GV, Stanishevsky AV, Gaidar BV, Svistov DV. Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Retrospective review of pathogenesis and modern theories. Pathological Physiology and Experimental Therapy. 2020; 64(3): 146-155. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.25557/0031-2991.2020.03.146-155
28. de Guilhem de Lataillade A, Boutoleau-Bretonnière C, Aguilar-Garcia J, Pallardy A, Bigot-Corbel E, Roualdes V, et al. Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus and frontotemporal dementia: An unexpected association. Brain Commun. 2022; 4(6): fcac319. https://doi.org/10.1093/braincomms/fcac319
29. Stoquart-ElSankari S, Balédent O, Gondry-Jouet C, Makki M, Godefroy O, Meyer ME. Aging eff ects on cerebral blood and cerebrospinal fl uid fl ows. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2007; 27(9): 1563-1572. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600462
30. Maeda S, Otani T, Yamada S, Watanabe Y, Ilik SY, Wada S. Biomechanical eff ects of hyper-dynamic cerebrospinal fl uid fl ow through the cerebral aqueduct in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus patients. J Biomech. 2023; 156: 111671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2023.111671
31. Giorgio C, Marcello L, Enricomaria M, Concetta A, Antonello C, Antonino G, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis in normal pressure hydrocephalus. World Neurosurg. 2024; 181: 171-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.10.110
32. Br G, Sharma PK, Polaka Y, S P, Natarajan P. The role of phase-contrast MRI in diagnosing cerebrospinal fl uid fl ow abnormalities. Cureus. 2024; 16(3): e57114. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.57114
33. Brutigam K, Vakis A, Tsitsipanis C. Pathogenesis of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: A review of knowledge. J Clin Neurosci. 2019; 61: 10-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2018.10.147
34. Aunan-Diop JS, Pedersen CB, Halle B, Jensen U, Munthe S, Harbo F, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography in normal pressure hydrocephalus – A scoping review. Neurosurg Rev. 2022; 45(2): 1157-1169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-021-01669-0
35. Kim DJ, Czosnyka Z, Kasprowicz M, Smieleweski P, Baledent O, Guerguerian AM, et al. Continuous monitoring of the Monro-Kellie doctrine: Is it possible? J Neurotrauma. 2012; 29(7): 1354-1363. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2018
36. Qvarlander S, Ambarki K, Wåhlin A, Jacobsson J. Cerebrospinal fl uid and blood fl ow patterns in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurol Scand. 2017; 135(5): 576-584. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12636
37. Czosnyka M, Czosnyka ZH, Whitfi eld PC, Donovan T, Pickard JD. Age dependence of cerebrospinal pressure-volume compensation in patients with hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 2001; 94(3): 482-486. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2001.94.3.0482
38. Bradley WG Jr. CSF fl ow in the brain in the context of normal pressure hydrocephalus. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36(5): 831-838. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4124
39. Volodin NN, Medvedev MI, Gorbunov AV. Computed tomography of the brain in newborns and young children: Illustrated guide for doctors. Moscow: GEOTAR-Med; 2002. (In Russ.)].
40. Kornienko VN, Pronin IN. Diagnostic neuroradiology. Moscow: IP Andreeva T.M.; 2006. (In Russ.)].
41. Turkin AM, Afandiev RM, Melnikova-Pitskhelauri TV, Fadeeva LM, Solozhentseva KD, Pogosbekyan EL, et al. Periventricular changes following hydrocephalus: quantitative MR-based assessment of tissue characteristics. Burdenko’s Journal of Neurosurgery. 2022; 86(4): 41-49. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro20228604141
42. Carswell C. Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Historical context and a contemporary guide. Pract Neurol. 2023; 23(1): 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1136/pn-2021-003291
43. Marmarou A, Bergsneider M, Klinge P, Relkin N, Black P. The value of supplemental prognostic tests for the preoperative assessment of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: INPH Guidelines, part III. Neurosurgery. 2005; 57(3 Suppl): S17-S28; discussion II-V. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000168184.01002.60
44. Afandiev RM, Fadeeva LM, Solozhentseva KD, Pronin IN Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of hydrocephalus. Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2021; 102(2): 124-133. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.20862/0042-4676-2021-102-2-124-133
45. Lobzin VYu, Alizade MRO, Lobzin SV, Lapina AV, Kolmakova KA, Gavrilov GV, et al. Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Modern approaches to diagnostic and possibilities of medicine treatment. Eff ective Pharmacotherapy. 2021; 17(10): 6-12. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.33978/2307-35862021-17-10-6-12
46. Brix MK, Westman E, Simmons A, Ringstad GA, Eide PK, Wagner-Larsen K, et al. The Evans’ index revisited: New cut-off levels for use in radiological assessment of ventricular enlargement in the elderly. Eur J Radiol. 2017; 95: 28-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.07.013
47. Jaraj D, Rabiei K, Marlow T, Jensen C, Skoog I, Wikkelsø C. Estimated ventricle size using Evans index: Reference values from a population-based sample. Eur J Neurol. 2017; 24(3): 468-474. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13226
48. Kockum K, Lilja-Lund O, Larsson EM, Rosell M, Söderström L, Virhammar J, et al. The idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus Radscale: A radiological scale for structured evaluation. Eur J Neurol. 2018; 25(3): 569-576. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13555
49. Fällmar D, Andersson O, Kilander L, Löwenmark M, Nyholm D, Virhammar J. Imaging features associated with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus have high specifi city even when comparing with vascular dementia and atypical parkinsonism. Fluids Barriers CNS. 2021; 18(1): 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12987-021-00270-3
50. Hattori T, Ohara M, Yuasa T, Azuma R, Chen Q, Hanazawa R, et al. Correlation of callosal angle at the splenium with gait and cognition in normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 2023; 139(2): 481-491. https://doi.org/10.3171/2022.12.JNS221825
51. Yamada S. Neuroimaging of adult hydrocephalus. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2025; 36(2): 183-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2024.11.007
52. Sasaki M, Honda S, Yuasa T, Iwamura A, Shibata E, Ohba H. Narrow CSF space at high convexity and high midline areas in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus detected by axial and coronal MRI. Neuroradiology. 2008; 50(2): 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-007-0318-x
53. Benedetto N, Gambacciani C, Aquila F, Di Carlo DT, Morganti R, Perrini P. A new quantitative method to assess disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space (DESH) in patients with possible idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: The SILVER index. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2017; 158: 27-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2017.04.015
54. Kitagaki H, Mori E, Ishii K, Yamaji S, Hirono N, Imamura T. CSF spaces in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Morphology and volumetry. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1998; 19(7): 1277-1284.
55. Agerskov S, Wallin M, Hellström P, Ziegelitz D, Wikkelsö C, Tullberg M. Absence of disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus, a sharp callosal angle, or other morphologic MRI markers should not be used to exclude patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus from shunt surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019; 40(1): 74-79. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5910
56. Milhorat TH, Clark RG, Hammock MK, McGrath PP. Structural, ultrastructural, and permeability changes in the ependyma and surrounding brain favoring equilibration in progressive hydrocephalus. Arch Neurol. 1970; 22(5): 397-407. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1970.00480230015002
57. Virhammar J, Laurell K, Cesarini KG, Larsson EM. The callosal angle measured on MRI as a predictor of outcome in idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 2014; 120(1): 178-184. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.8.JNS13575
58. Ishii K, Kanda T, Harada A, Miyamoto N, Kawaguchi T, Shimada K, et al. Clinical impact of the callosal angle in the diagnosis of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18(11): 2678-2683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1044-4
59. Mori E, Ishikawa M, Kato T, Kazui H, Miyake H, Miyajima M, et al; Japanese Society of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus. Guidelines for management of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Second edition. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2012; 52(11): 775-809. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.52.775
60. Hamilton MG, Williams MA, Edwards S, Tullberg M. Guidelines for diagnosis and management of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2025; 36(2): 199-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2024.12.006
61. Evans WA. An encephalographic ratio for estimating ventricular enlargement and cerebral atrophy. Arch Neurol Psychiatry. 1942; (47): 931-937.
62. Fazekas F, Barkhof F, Wahlund LO, Pantoni L, Erkinjuntti T, Scheltens P, et al. CT and MRI rating of white matter lesions. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2002; 13(Suppl 2): 31-36.
63. Holodny AI, George AE, de Leon MJ, Golomb J, Kalnin AJ, Cooper PR. Focal dilation and paradoxical collapse of cortical fi ssures and sulci in patients with normal-pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 1998; 89(5): 742-747.
64. Virhammar J, Laurell K, Cesarini KG, Larsson EM. Increase in callosal angle and decrease in ventricular volume after shunt surgery in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 2019; 130(1): 130-135. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.JNS17547
65. Kockum K, Virhammar J, Riklund K, Söderström L, Larsson EM, Laurell K. Diagnostic accuracy of the iNPH Radscale in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. PLoS One. 2020; 15(4): e0232275. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232275
66. Miskin N, Patel H, Franceschi AM, Ades-Aron B, Le A, Damadian BE, et al. Diagnosis of normal-pressure hydrocephalus: Use of traditional measures in the era of volumetric MR imaging. Radiology. 2017; 285(1): 197-205.
67. Chen J, He W, Zhang X, Lv M, Zhou X, Yang X, et al. Value of MRI-based semi-quantitative structural neuroimaging in predicting the prognosis of patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus after shunt surgery. Eur Radiol. 2022; 32(11): 7800-7810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-02208733-3
68. Kumari S, Ranjan R. CSF fl owmetry: An innovative technique in diagnosing normal pressure hydrocephalus. Int J Curr Pharmaceut Rev Res. 2024; 16(2): 564-568. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12799108
69. Algin O, Hakyemez B, Taskapilioglu O, Ocakoglu G, Bekar A, Parlak M. Morphologic features and fl ow void phenomenon in normal pressure hydrocephalus and other dementias: Are they really signifi cant? Acad Radiol. 2009; 16(11): 1373-1380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2009.06.010
70. Shanks J, Markenroth Bloch K, Laurell K, Cesarini KG, Fahlström M, Larsson EM, et al. Aqueductal CSF stroke volume is increased in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus and decreases after shunt surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019; 40(3): 453-459. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5972
71. Ringstad G, Vatnehol SAS, Eide PK. Glymphatic MRI in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Brain. 2017; 140(10): 2691-2705. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awx191
72. Hashimoto M, Ishikawa M, Mori E, Kuwana N; Study of INPH on neurological improvement (SINPHONI). Diagnosis of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus is supported by MRI-based scheme: A prospective cohort study. Cerebrospinal Fluid Res. 2010; 7: 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-8454-7-18
73. Narita W, Nishio Y, Baba T, Iizuka O, Ishihara T, Matsuda M, et al. High-convexity tightness predicts the shunt response in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016; 37(10): 1831-1837. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4838
74. Bateman GA, Bateman AR. Diff erences in the calculated transvenous pressure drop between chronic hydrocephalus and idiopathic intracranial hypertension. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019; 40(1): 68-73. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5883
75. Relkin N, Marmarou A, Klinge P, Bergsneider M, Black P. Diagnosing idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery. 2005; 57(3 Suppl): S4-S16; discussion II-V. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000168185.29659.C5
76. Craven CL, Toma AK, Mostafa T, Patel N, Watkins LD. The predictive value of DESH for shunt responsiveness in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Clin Neurosci. 2016; 34: 294-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2016.09.004
77. Shinoda N, Hirai O, Hori S, Mikami K, Bando T, Shimo D, et al. Utility of MRI-based disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus scoring for predicting prognosis after surgery for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Clinical research. J Neurosurg. 2017; 127: 14361442. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.9.JNS161080
78. Badagard H, Braun M, Nilsson D, Stridh L, Virhammar J. Negative predictors of shunt surgery outcome in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurol Scand. 2020; 141(3): 219-225.
Review
For citations:
Bogomyakova O.B., Stankevich Yu.A., Tulupov A.A. Magnetic resonance imaging for idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: A review of the scientific literature. Sibneuro. 2026;2(1):12-23. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.64265/3033-649X-2026.2.1.12-23
Views:
53
JATS XML
Email this article 