ArticleEJNMMI physics2017
Model selection criteria for dynamic brain PET studies.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying capillary transit time distribution: a novel tracer kinetic model accounting for leakiness, back diffusion, and perfusion in MRI and PET imaging-the outflow model.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Simplified dosimetry using two-time-point kinetic modeling ofMedical physics · 2026Article
- Model selection for dynamic PET compartmental modelling ofEJNMMI research · 2025Article
- A blood-free modeling approach for the quantification of the blood-to-brain tracer exchange in TSPO PET imaging.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Molecular Imaging of Pulmonary Inflammation in Users of Electronic and Combustible Cigarettes: A Pilot Study.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
- Non-invasive quantification of acute macrophagic lung inflammation with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- [Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2021Article
- Review
- DynamicBMC medical imaging · 2021Article
- A methodological investigation of healthy tissue, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other lesions with dynamicEJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Short- and long-term memory of moving amoeboid cells.PloS one · 2021Article
- GABAMolecular imaging and biology · 2020Article
- Kinetic modeling ofEJNMMI research · 2020Article
- Article
- Quantifying SV2A density and drug occupancy in the human brain using [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral criteria exist to identify the optimal model for quantification of tracer kinetics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correspondence in kinetic model preference identification for brain PET studies among five model selection criteria: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), AIC unbiased (AIC MATERIALS AND
methodsSix tracers were evaluated: [
resultsFor all radiotracers, strong agreement was seen across the model selection criteria. The F-test was considered as the reference, as it is a frequently used hypothesis test. The F-test confirmed the AIC preferred model in 87% of all cases. The strongest (but minimal) disagreement across regional TACs was found when comparing AIC with AIC
conclusionIn conclusion, all five model selection criteria resulted in similar conclusions with only minor differences that did not affect overall model selection.
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.