ArticleMedical image analysis2021
Imitation learning for improved 3D PET/MR attenuation correction.
Article in Medical image analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic literature review: deep learning techniques for synthetic medical image generation and their applications in radiotherapy.Frontiers in radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Text-Guided Inpainting for Aesthetic Prediction in Orthofacial Surgery: A Patient-Centered AI Approach.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- SeRL: Style-embedding representation learning for unsupervised CT images synthesis from unpaired MR images.Biomedical signal processing and control · 2024Article
- Evaluation of manual and automated approaches for segmentation and extraction of quantitative indices from [Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2024Article
- A review of PET attenuation correction methods for PET-MR.EJNMMI physics · 2023Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in brain molecular imaging.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2022Review
- MRI-guided attenuation correction in torso PET/MRI: Assessment of segmentation-, atlas-, and deep learning-based approaches in the presence of outliers.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
- Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [EJNMMI physics · 2020Article
- Attenuation correction for human PET/MRI studies.Physics in medicine and biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The assessment of the quality of synthesised/pseudo Computed Tomography (pCT) images is commonly measured by an intensity-wise similarity between the ground truth CT and the pCT. However, when using the pCT as an attenuation map (μ-map) for PET reconstruction in Positron Emission Tomography Magnetic Resonance Imaging (PET/MRI) minimising the error between pCT and CT neglects the main objective of predicting a pCT that when used as μ-map reconstructs a pseudo PET (pPET) which is as similar as possible to the gold standard CT-derived PET reconstruction. This observation motivated us to propose a novel multi-hypothesis deep learning framework explicitly aimed at PET reconstruction application. A convolutional neural network (CNN) synthesises pCTs by minimising a combination of the pixel-wise error between pCT and CT and a novel metric-loss that itself is defined by a CNN and aims to minimise consequent PET residuals. Training is performed on a database of twenty 3D MR/CT/PET brain image pairs. Quantitative results on a fully independent dataset of twenty-three 3D MR/CT/PET image pairs show that the network is able to synthesise more accurate pCTs. The Mean Absolute Error on the pCT (110.98 HU ± 19.22 HU) compared to a baseline CNN (172.12 HU ± 19.61 HU) and a multi-atlas propagation approach (153.40 HU ± 18.68 HU), and subsequently lead to a significant improvement in the PET reconstruction error (4.74% ± 1.52% compared to baseline 13.72% ± 2.48% and multi-atlas propagation 6.68% ± 2.06%).
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.