Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34941643›Full record

ReviewTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2021

[

Tanuj Puri, Michelle L Frost, Gary J Cook, Glen M Blake

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [The experimental study ofSheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Use of bone-SPECT/CT and Na[Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2025
    Review
  4. Structural and molecular imaging-based characterization of soft tissue and vascular calcification in hyperphosphatemic familial tumoral calcinosis.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Emerging Role ofPET clinics · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Effects of dynamic [Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tanuj PuriDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 7EH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9273-8226
Michelle L FrostInstitute of Cancer Research Clinical Trials & Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton SM2 5NG, UK.
Gary J CookDepartment of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 7EH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8732-8134
Glen M BlakeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 7EH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1530-5267

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This report describes the significance of the kinetic parameters (k-values) obtained from the analysis of dynamic positron emission tomography (PET) scans using the Hawkins model describing the pharmacokinetics of sodium fluoride ([

Indexed as

Fluorine RadioisotopesSodium FluoridePositron-Emission TomographyFluorine RadioisotopesSodium Fluoride[18F]NaF[18F] sodium fluoridebone metabolismclinical significancecomputed tomographyCTdynamic positron emission tomographyHawkins modelkinetic modelingPET

Identifiers

PMID34941643
PMCPMC8708178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.