ArticlePediatric radiology2020
Clinical evaluation of reconstruction and acquisition time for pediatric
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of regularization factor and attenuation correction method of Q.Clear reconstruction for brain PET/MR in epileptic patients.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Optimization of penalization function in Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm for [Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- Phantom and clinical evaluation of the Bayesian penalised likelihood reconstruction algorithm Q.Clear without PSF correction in amyloid PET images.EJNMMI physics · 2024Article
- The efficacy of short acquisition time usingEJNMMI research · 2024Article
- Reduced count pediatric whole-bodyPediatric radiology · 2024Article
- EANM procedural recommendations for managing the paediatric patient in diagnostic nuclear medicine.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Review
- The effects of various penalty parameter values in Q.Clear algorithm for rectal cancer detection onEJNMMI physics · 2023Article
- BSREM for Brain Metastasis Detection with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in Lung Cancer Patients.Journal of digital imaging · 2022Article
- A cross-scanner and cross-tracer deep learning method for the recovery of standard-dose imaging quality from low-dose PET.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Suppressing interferences of EIT on synchronous recording EEG based on comb filter for seizure detection.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- International consensus on the use of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Validation of Deep Learning-based Augmentation for ReducedRadiology. Artificial intelligence · 2021Article
- Improved detection of in-transit metastases of malignant melanoma with BSREM reconstruction in digital [European radiology · 2021Article
- Moving the goalposts while scoring-the dilemma posed by new PET technologies.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
objectiveTo quantify the diagnostic performance of a block-sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) tool and reduced effective counts in brain PET/CT for pediatric epilepsy patients on a digital silicon photomultiplier system. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe included 400 sets of brain PET/CT images from 25 pediatric patients (0.5-16 years old) in this retrospective study. Patient images were reconstructed with conventional iterative techniques or BSREM with varied penalization factor (β), at varied acquisition time (45 s, 90 s, 180 s, 300 s) to simulate reduced count density. Two pediatric nuclear medicine physicians reviewed images in random order - blinded to patient, reconstruction method and imaging time - and scored technical quality (noise, spatial resolution, artifacts), clinical quality (image quality of the cortex, basal ganglia and thalamus) and overall diagnostic satisfaction on a 5-point scale.
resultsReconstruction with BSREM improved quality and clinical scores across all count levels, with the greatest benefits in low-count conditions. Image quality scores were greatest at 300-s acquisition times with β=500 (overall; noise; artifacts; image quality of the cortex, basal ganglia and thalamus) or β=200 (spatial resolution). No statistically significant difference in the highest graded reconstruction was observed between imaging at 180 s and 300 s with an appropriately implemented penalization factor (β=350-500), indicating that a reduction in dose or acquisition time is feasible without reduction in diagnostic satisfaction.
conclusionClinical evaluation of pediatric
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.