ArticleEJNMMI physics2019
Multicentre quantitative
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Guideline
- Straightforward PET phantom preparation usingAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Observational
- CanJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025Article
- The accuracy and intra- and interobserver variability of PSMA PET/CT for the local staging of primary prostate cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- EANM guidance document: dosimetry for first-in-human studies and early phase clinical trials.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Optimization of Y-90 Radioembolization Imaging for Post-Treatment Dosimetry on a Long Axial Field-of-View PET/CT Scanner.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Variability in PET image quality and quantification measured with a permanently filledEJNMMI physics · 2023Article
- A review of harmonization strategies for quantitative PET.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2023Review
- Artificial intelligence-basedFrontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Relationships between uptake of [EJNMMI research · 2022Article
- A new colleague in nuclear medicine, the clinical technologist: quo vadis?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Moving the goalposts while scoring-the dilemma posed by new PET technologies.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Standardisation of conventional and advanced iterative reconstruction methods for Gallium-68 multi-centre PET-CT trials.EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Performance evaluation of the Q.Clear reconstruction framework versus conventional reconstruction algorithms for quantitative brain PET-MR studies.EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Early differences in dynamic uptake of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in primary prostate cancer: A test-retest study.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePerformance standards for quantitative
methodsA survey across Dutch hospitals was performed to evaluate differences in clinical
resultsThe survey across Dutch hospitals showed a large variation in clinical
conclusions
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.