Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26161630›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2015

Dictionary learning for data recovery in positron emission tomography.

SeyyedMajid Valiollahzadeh, John W Clark, Osama Mawlawi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. An improved patch-based regularization method for PET image reconstruction.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

SeyyedMajid ValiollahzadehDepartment of Electrical and computer Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA.
John W ClarkDepartment of Electrical and computer Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA.
Osama MawlawiDepartment of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Rice University · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Kathrin Milbury · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compressed sensing (CS) aims to recover images from fewer measurements than that governed by the Nyquist sampling theorem. Most CS methods use analytical predefined sparsifying domains such as total variation, wavelets, curvelets, and finite transforms to perform this task. In this study, we evaluated the use of dictionary learning (DL) as a sparsifying domain to reconstruct PET images from partially sampled data, and compared the results to the partially and fully sampled image (baseline).A CS model based on learning an adaptive dictionary over image patches was developed to recover missing observations in PET data acquisition. The recovery was done iteratively in two steps: a dictionary learning step and an image reconstruction step. Two experiments were performed to evaluate the proposed CS recovery algorithm: an IEC phantom study and five patient studies. In each case, 11% of the detectors of a GE PET/CT system were removed and the acquired sinogram data were recovered using the proposed DL algorithm. The recovered images (DL) as well as the partially sampled images (with detector gaps) for both experiments were then compared to the baseline. Comparisons were done by calculating RMSE, contrast recovery and SNR in ROIs drawn in the background, and spheres of the phantom as well as patient lesions.For the phantom experiment, the RMSE for the DL recovered images were 5.8% when compared with the baseline images while it was 17.5% for the partially sampled images. In the patients' studies, RMSE for the DL recovered images were 3.8%, while it was 11.3% for the partially sampled images. Our proposed CS with DL is a good approach to recover partially sampled PET data. This approach has implications toward reducing scanner cost while maintaining accurate PET image quantification.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsModels, TheoreticalPhantoms, ImagingFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLungMaleMiddle AgedPositron-Emission Tomography

Identifiers

PMID26161630
PMCPMC4520326
OpenAlexW1498220771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.