ArticleEuropean radiology2021
Are lesion features reproducible between
Article in European radiology, 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- An AI-Based Solution for Denoising Fast-Acquisition [Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Baseline [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- The Diagnostic Performance of 2-[Cancers · 2024Review
- Evaluation of Semiautomatic and Deep Learning-Based Fully Automatic Segmentation Methods on [Journal of digital imaging · 2023Article
- Prediction of pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy using baseline FDG PET heterogeneity features in breast cancer.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Imaging Lymphoma With F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT: What Should Be Known About Normal Variants, Pitfalls, and Artifacts?Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2021Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare lesion features extracted from
methodsWhole-body
resultsIn total, 323
conclusionUnder controlled acquisition and reconstruction parameters, most of the features studied can be used for research and clinical work. This is especially important for multicenter studies and patient follow-ups. KEY POINTS: • Using manufacturer standard clinical reconstruction protocols, lesions SUV was significantly higher when using the digital scanner, especially the SUV
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.