ArticleMedical physics2018
Comparison of sparse domain approaches for 4D SPECT dynamic image reconstruction.
Article in Medical physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- In silico simulation of hepatic arteries: An open-source algorithm for efficient synthetic data generation.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Research Progress of Imaging Methods for Detection of Microvascular Angina Pectoris in Diabetic Patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDynamic imaging (DI) provides additional diagnostic information in emission tomography in comparison to conventional static imaging at the cost of being computationally more challenging. Dynamic single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) reconstruction is particularly difficult because of the limitations in the sampling geometry present in most existing scanners. We have developed an algorithm Spline Initialized Factor Analysis of Dynamic Structures (SIFADS) that is a matrix factorization method for reconstructing the dynamics of tracers in tissues and blood directly from the projections in dynamic cardiac SPECT, without first resorting to any 3D reconstruction.
methodsSIFADS is different from "pure" factor analysis in dynamic structures (FADS) in that it employs a dedicated spline-based pre-initialization. In this paper, we analyze the convergence properties of SIFADS and FADS using multiple metrics. The performances of the two approaches are evaluated for numerically simulated data and for real dynamic SPECT data from canine and human subjects.
resultsFor SIFADS, metrics analyzed for reconstruction algorithm convergence show better features of the metric curves vs iterations. In addition, SIAFDS provides better tissue segmentations than that from pure FADS. Measured computational times are also typically better for SIFADS implementations than those with pure FADS.
conclusionThe analysis supports the utility of the pre-initialization of a factorization algorithm for better dynamic SPECT image reconstruction.
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.