Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36394638›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2022

Validation of dynamic [

Susanna Jakobson Mo, Jan Axelsson, Lars Stiernman, Katrine Riklund

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susanna Jakobson MoDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. susanna.jakobson.mo@umu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8169-2584
Jan AxelssonUmeå Centre for Functional Brain Imaging (UFBI), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Lars StiernmanUmeå Centre for Functional Brain Imaging (UFBI), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Katrine RiklundDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Umeå University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDopamine transporter (DAT) imaging is used in the diagnostic work-up in suspected parkinsonian syndromes and dementia with Lewy bodies but cannot differentiate between these syndromes, and an extra brain imaging examination of the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) or glucose metabolism is often needed for differential diagnosis. The requirement of two different imaging examinations is resource-consuming and inconvenient for the patients. Therefore, imaging of both cortical blood flow and DAT imaging with the same radiotracer would be more convenient and cost-effective. The aim of this study was to test whether relative regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF

methodsThe rCBF

resultsThere was a strong linear correlation across all subjects between R1 and F in the frontal, parietal, temporal, cingulate and occipital cortex as well as in the striatum (r  ≥  0.731-0.905, p  < 0.001) with a good-to-excellent ICC, ranging from 0.727 to 0.943 (p < 0.001).

conclusionsOur results suggest that FE-PE2I may be used as a proxy for cerebral perfusion, thus potentially serving as a radiotracer for assessment of both DAT availability and rCBF

trial registrationEUDRA-CT 2015-003045-26. Registered 23 October 2015 https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2015-003045-26.

Indexed as

15O H2O18F FE-PE2Cerebral blood flowCerebral perfusionParkinsonian syndromesParkinsonismPositron emission tomography

Identifiers

PMID36394638
PMCPMC9672223
OpenAlexW4309467425

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.