ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2018
EANM/EARL FDG-PET/CT accreditation - summary results from the first 200 accredited imaging systems.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
96 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.
- EANM practice guideline for quantitative SPECT-CT.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Guideline
- A Bayesian approach for diagnostic accuracy of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neuro-oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Diagnostic accuracy ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in nuclear medicine.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- Real-world application ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Digital versus analogue PET in parathyroid imaging: comparison of PET metrics and machine learning-based characterisation of hyperfunctioning lesions (the DIGI-PET study).European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Beyond discovery: are we understanding PET tracers as fast as we invent them? a critical review.EJNMMI research · 2026Review
- Real world experience with [Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Deep learning-enhanced digital-BGO versus TOF PET/CT: comparative assessment of detection, quantitation, and overall image quality.EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- An exploratory assessment of early and delta PET radiomic features for outcome prediction in locally advanced cervical cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Standardization of PET/CT Performance Requirements for Whole-Body Quantitative Imaging: An International Proposal.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025Review
- Can non-tumorous liver tissue serve as a reliable reference measure for [EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary Perspectives of Clinical Trials in Theranostics.World journal of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Radiomics with Clinical Data and [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Color Maps: Facilitating the Clinical Impact of Quantitative MRI.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Value of Increased [18F]FDG Uptake in Locoregional Lymph Nodes on PET/CT in Patients with Suspected Fracture-Related Infection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Quantification in respiratory-gated PET acquisition: can data-driven methods replace device-based systems?-a comparative and retrospective study.EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- A Machine Learning Model Based on Radiomic Features as a Tool to Identify Active Giant Cell Arteritis on [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFrom 2010 until July 2016, the EANM Research Ltd. (EARL) FDG-PET/CT accreditation program has collected over 2500 phantom datasets from approximately 200 systems and 150 imaging sites worldwide. The objective of this study is to report the findings and impact of the accreditation program on the participating PET/CT systems.
methodsTo obtain and maintain EARL accredited status, sites were required to complete and submit two phantom scans - calibration quality control (CalQC), using a uniform cylindrical phantom and image quality control (IQQC), using a NEMA NU2-2007 body phantom. Average volumetric SUV bias and SUV recovery coefficients (RC) were calculated and the data evaluated on the basis of quality control (QC) type, approval status, PET/CT system manufacturer and submission order.
resultsSUV bias in 5% (n = 96) of all CalQC submissions (n = 1816) exceeded 10%. After corrective actions following EARL feedback, sites achieved 100% compliance within EARL specifications. 30% (n = 1381) of SUVmean and 23% (n = 1095) of SUVmax sphere recoveries from IQQC submissions failed to meet EARL accreditation criteria while after accreditation, failure rate decreased to 12% (n = 360) and 9% (n = 254), respectively. Most systems demonstrated longitudinal SUV bias reproducibility within ±5%, while RC values remained stable and generally within ±10% for the four largest and ±20% for the two smallest spheres.
conclusionsRegardless of manufacturer or model, all investigated systems are able to comply with the EARL specifications. Within the EARL accreditation program, gross PET/CT calibration errors are successfully identified and longitudinal variability in PET/CT performances reduced. The program demonstrates that a harmonising accreditation procedure is feasible and achievable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.