ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2023
Q.Clear reconstruction for reducing the scanning time for
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2023. 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.
- Q.Clear reconstruction shortening the scanning time forEJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of regularization factor and attenuation correction method of Q.Clear reconstruction for brain PET/MR in epileptic patients.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Article
- Renal dynamic scintigraphy using 3D-ring CZT cameras: comparison with NaI(Tl).EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- Innovations in clinical PET image reconstruction: advances in Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm and deep learning.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison ofEJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Impact of a deep progressive reconstruction algorithm on low-dose or fast-scan PET image quality and Deauville score in patients with lymphoma.EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to determine whether Q.Clear positron emission tomography (PET) reconstruction may reduce tracer injection dose or shorten scanning time in
methodsWe retrospectively collected cases of
resultsQ.Clear reconstruction significantly increased SUV
conclusionsQ.Clear reconstruction was useful for reducing PET injection dose or scanning time while maintaining the image quality. Q.Clear may affect PET quantification, and it is necessary to establish diagnostic recommendations based on Q.Clear results for Q.Clear application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36847826What 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.