ArticleJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine2021
Measurement of PET Quantitative Bias In Vivo.
Article in Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of imaging-based bone marrow dosimetry methodologies and their dose-effect relationships in [EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Use of relative Patlak plot Ki' images as an alternative to standard Patlak plot Ki images in clinical practice.EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- PET imaging of AAV9 and AAVBR1 trafficking in normal mice.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Bone turnover prediction in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing hemodialysis using shortened dynamicScientific reports · 2024Article
- Specific Uptake in the Bone Marrow Causes High Absorbed Red Marrow Doses During [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison between a dual-time-window protocol and other simplified protocols for dynamic total-bodyEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
- Quantitative accuracy in total-body imaging using the uEXPLORER PET/CT scanner.Physics in medicine and biology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative imaging biomarkers are widely used in PET for both research and clinical applications, yet bias in the underlying image data has not been well characterized. In the absence of a readily available reference standard for in vivo quantification, bias in PET images has been inferred using physical phantoms, even though arrangements of this sort provide only a poor approximation of the imaging environment in real patient examinations. In this study, we used data acquired from patient volunteers to assess PET quantitative bias in vivo. Image-derived radioactivity concentrations in the descending aorta were compared with blood samples counted on a calibrated γ-counter.
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.