ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Organ-Specific Positron Emission Tomography Scanners for Breast Imaging: Comparison between the Performances of Prior and Novel Models.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of image quality of breast-specific positron emission tomography between opposite-type and ring-shaped systems: insights from Phantom and clinical studies in a Japanese multicenter trial.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Development of a Prototype AWSM-PET Device for Augmented Whole-Body PET Imaging and Initial Human Study.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- Assessing small-lesion detectability and acquisition time optimisation in silicon-detector-Based PET: a phantom study.EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Impact ofEJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Can the Newer Model of Breast-Specific Positron Emission Tomography Reduce the "Blind Area"?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The performances of photomultiplier tube (PMT)-based dedicated breast positron emission tomography (PET) and silicon photomultiplier tube (SiPM)-based time-of-flight (TOF) PET, which is applicable not only to breast imaging but also to head imaging, were compared using a phantom study. A cylindrical phantom containing four spheres (3-10 mm in diameter) filled with
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.