ArticleIEEE transactions on medical imaging2020
Bootstrap-Optimised Regularised Image Reconstruction for Emission Tomography.
Article in IEEE transactions on medical imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized MR-Informed Diffusion Models for 3D PET Image Reconstruction.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2026Article
- Likelihood-Scheduled Score-Based Generative Modeling for Fully 3D PET Image Reconstruction.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2025Article
- Kinetic model-informed deep learning for multiplexed PET image separation.EJNMMI physics · 2024Article
- Architecting the metabolic reprogramming survival risk framework in LUAD through single-cell landscape analysis: three-stage ensemble learning with genetic algorithm optimization.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Pre-training via Transfer Learning and Pretext Learning a Convolutional Neural Network for Automated Assessments of Clinical PET Image Quality.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In emission tomography, iterative image reconstruction from noisy measured data usually results in noisy images, and so regularisation is often used to compensate for noise. However, in practice, an appropriate, automatic and precise specification of the strength of regularisation for image reconstruction from a given noisy measured dataset remains unresolved. Existing approaches are either empirical approximations with no guarantee of generalisation, or else are computationally intensive cross-validation methods requiring full reconstructions for a limited set of preselected regularisation strengths. In contrast, we propose a novel methodology embedded within iterative image reconstruction, using one or more bootstrapped replicates of the measured data for precise optimisation of the regularisation. The approach uses a conventional unregularised iterative update of a current image estimate from the noisy measured data, and then also uses the bootstrap replicate to obtain a bootstrap update of the current image estimate. The method then seeks the regularisation hyperparameters which, when applied to the bootstrap update of the image, lead to a best fit of the regularised bootstrap update to the conventional measured data update. This corresponds to estimating the degree of regularisation needed in order to map the noisy update to a model of the mean of an ensemble of noisy updates. For a given regularised objective function (e.g. penalised likelihood), no hyperparameter selection or tuning is required. The method is demonstrated for positron emission tomography (PET) data at different noise levels, and delivers near-optimal reconstructions (in terms of reconstruction error) without any knowledge of the ground truth, nor any form of training data.
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.