ReviewEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2009
Risks and safety aspects related to PET/MR examinations.
Review in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-modal low-dose medical imaging through instruction-guided unified AI.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The Neuroimmunology of Autism.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
- Article
- Double-strand breaks in lymphocyte DNA of humans exposed to [EJNMMI research · 2020Article
- PET/MRI: a frontier in era of complementary hybrid imaging.European journal of hybrid imaging · 2018Review
- Does the novel integrated PET/MRI offer the same diagnostic performance as PET/CT for oncological indications?PloS one · 2014Article
- Competitive advantage of PET/MRI.European journal of radiology · 2014Review
- PET/MR: a paradigm shift.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2013Review
- MR/PET or PET/MRI: does it matter?Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2013Article
- A pilot study utilizing whole body 18 F-FDG-PET/CT as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism.Thrombosis research · 2012Article
- The future of hybrid imaging-part 3: PET/MR, small-animal imaging and beyond.Insights into imaging · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe introduction of positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) systems into medical practice in the foreseeable future may not only lead to a gain in clinical diagnosis compared to PET/computed tomography (CT) imaging due to the superior soft-tissue contrast of the MR technology but can also substantially reduce exposure of patients to ionizing radiation. On the other hand, there are also risks and health effects associated with the use of diagnostic MR devices that have to be considered carefully.
objectivesThis review article summarizes biophysical and biological aspects, which are of relevance for the assessment of health effects related to the exposure of patients to both ionizing radiation in PET and magnetic and electromagnetic fields in MR. On this basis, some considerations concerning the justification and optimization of PET/MR examinations are presented--as far as this is possible at this very early stage. DISCUSSION: Current safety standards do not take into account synergistic effects of ionizing radiation and magnetic and electromagnetic fields. In the light of the developing PET/MR technology, there is an urgent need to investigate this aspect in more detail for exposure levels that will occur at PET/MR systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19104806What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.