Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26982626›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2016

A no-gold-standard technique for objective assessment of quantitative nuclear-medicine imaging methods.

Abhinav K Jha, Brian Caffo, Eric C Frey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Need for objective task-based evaluation of AI-based segmentation methods for quantitative PET.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. A Projection-Domain Low-Count Quantitative SPECT Method forIEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2023
    Article
  12. Nuclear Medicine and Artificial Intelligence: Best Practices for Evaluation (the RELAINCE Guidelines).Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. A physics and learning-based transmission-less attenuation compensation method for SPECT.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2021
    Article
  15. Task-based assessment of binned and list-mode SPECT systems.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2021
    Article
  16. A LIST-MODE OSEM-BASED ATTENUATION AND SCATTER COMPENSATION METHOD FOR SPECT.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. No-gold-standard evaluation of image-acquisition methods using patient data.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. No-gold-standard evaluation of quantitative imaging methods in the presence of correlated noise.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering
    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.

Abhinav K JhaDivision of Medical Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Brian CaffoDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Eric C FreyDivision of Medical Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.

Funding

Multi-Modality Quantitiative Imaging for Evaluation of Response to Cancer TherapyU01CA140204 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DU, YONG, SOLNES, LILJA · 2011 to 2022
$6.1M
Quantitative SPECT for Targeted Radionuclide TherapyR01CA109234 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FREY, ERIC C. · 2006 to 2015
$4.2M
End-to-End Optimization of SPECT Instrumentation, Acquisition, and ReconstructionR01EB016231 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FREY, ERIC C., LINKS, JONATHAN M. · 2013 to 2016
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA109234NCI NIH HHS R01-CA109234NCI NIH HHS U01 CA140204NCI NIH HHS U01-CA140204NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB016231NIBIB NIH HHS R01-EB016231
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective optimization and evaluation of nuclear-medicine quantitative imaging methods using patient data is highly desirable but often hindered by the lack of a gold standard. Previously, a regression-without-truth (RWT) approach has been proposed for evaluating quantitative imaging methods in the absence of a gold standard, but this approach implicitly assumes that bounds on the distribution of true values are known. Several quantitative imaging methods in nuclear-medicine imaging measure parameters where these bounds are not known, such as the activity concentration in an organ or the volume of a tumor. We extended upon the RWT approach to develop a no-gold-standard (NGS) technique for objectively evaluating such quantitative nuclear-medicine imaging methods with patient data in the absence of any ground truth. Using the parameters estimated with the NGS technique, a figure of merit, the noise-to-slope ratio (NSR), can be computed, which can rank the methods on the basis of precision. An issue with NGS evaluation techniques is the requirement of a large number of patient studies. To reduce this requirement, the proposed method explored the use of multiple quantitative measurements from the same patient, such as the activity concentration values from different organs in the same patient. The proposed technique was evaluated using rigorous numerical experiments and using data from realistic simulation studies. The numerical experiments demonstrated that the NSR was estimated accurately using the proposed NGS technique when the bounds on the distribution of true values were not precisely known, thus serving as a very reliable metric for ranking the methods on the basis of precision. In the realistic simulation study, the NGS technique was used to rank reconstruction methods for quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) based on their performance on the task of estimating the mean activity concentration within a known volume of interest. Results showed that the proposed technique provided accurate ranking of the reconstruction methods for 97.5% of the 50 noise realizations. Further, the technique was robust to the choice of evaluated reconstruction methods. The simulation study pointed to possible violations of the assumptions made in the NGS technique under clinical scenarios. However, numerical experiments indicated that the NGS technique was robust in ranking methods even when there was some degree of such violation.

Indexed as

HumansPhantoms, ImagingReference StandardsTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

Identifiers

PMID26982626
PMCPMC4921224

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.