ArticleEJNMMI physics2021
Quantitative SPECT (QSPECT) at high count rates with contemporary SPECT/CT systems.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- QuantitativeEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Intersoftware variability in SPECT quality control: A technical note on analytical discrepancies and compliance decisions.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Review
- Quantitative SPECT/CT: Technique and Clinical Applications.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026Review
- Optimization ofEJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Bridging physics and practice: evaluating sensitivity, septal penetration, and detector dead time in terbium-161 gamma-camera imaging.EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Gamma camera imaging characteristics ofEJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- 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
- Count-rate management inEJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Impact of the dead-time correction method on quantitativeEJNMMI physics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate QSPECT is crucial in dosimetry-based, personalized radiopharmaceutical therapy with
methodsUsing up to 14 GBq of
resultsThe Siemens system had a higher calibration factor (100.0 cps/MBq) and a lower dead-time constant (0.49 μs) than those from GE (75.4-87.5 cps/MBq; 1.74 μs). Activities of up to 3.3 vs. 2.3-2.7 GBq, respectively, were quantifiable by QSPECT before the observed count rate plateaued or decreased. When used in single-detector mode, the QSPECT capability of the former system increased to 5.1 GBq, whereas that of the latter two systems remained independent of the detectors activation mode.
conclusionDespite similar hardware, SPECT/CT systems' response can significantly differ at high count rate, which impacts their QSPECT capability in a post-therapeutic setting.
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.