ArticleEJNMMI physics2020
Impact of dead time on quantitative
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- State-of-the-art and future developments in dosimetry for SSTR- and PSMA-targeting radioligand therapies.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- A Monte Carlo study comparing dead-time losses of a gamma camera between tungsten functional paper and lead sheet for dosimetry in targeted radionuclide therapy with Lu-177.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Article
- An anthropomorphic body phantom for the determination of calibration factor in radionuclide treatment dosimetry.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2023Article
- Impact of the dead-time correction method on quantitativeEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Patient-specific dosimetry adapted to variable number of SPECT/CT time-points per cycle forEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Dosimetry in Clinical Radiopharmaceutical Therapy of Cancer: Practicality Versus Perfection in Current Practice.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021Review
- Quantitative SPECT (QSPECT) at high count rates with contemporary SPECT/CT systems.EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Feasibility of Single-Time-Point Dosimetry for Radiopharmaceutical Therapies.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDead time may affect the accuracy of quantitative SPECT (QPSECT), and thus of dosimetry. The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of dead time on
methodsQSPECT/CT was performed on days 1 and 3 during 564 personalized
resultsThe probability to observe a larger dead time increased with the injected activity. A dead-time loss greater than 5% affected 14.4% and 5.7% of QSPECT scans performed at days 1 and 3, respectively. This resulted in renal absorbed dose estimates that would have been underestimated by more than 5% in 5.7% of cycles if no dead-time correction was applied, with a maximum underestimation of 22.1%. In the simulated empiric regime, this potential dose underestimation would have been limited to 6.2%.
conclusionDead-time correction improves the accuracy of dosimetry in
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.