ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Artificial intelligence-based
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-count whole-body PET denoising with deep learning in a multicenter, multi-tracer and externally validated study.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Implantation of an Artificial Intelligence Denoising Algorithm Using SubtlePET™ with Various Radiotracers: 18F-FDG, 68Ga PSMA-11 and 18F-FDOPA, Impact on the Technologist Radiation Doses.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- AI-Based Noise-Reduction Filter for Whole-Body Planar Bone Scintigraphy Reliably Improves Low-Count Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The impact of introducing deep learning based [EJNMMI research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The yield per elution of a Methods: All patients addressed to our PET unit for a Results: The mean injected dose of 2.1 (0.4) MBq/kg per patient was significantly higher in the Protocol_FixedDose group as compared to 1.5 (0.1) MBq/kg for the Protocol_WeightDose group. Protocol_WeightDose led to noisier images than Protocol_FixedDose with higher CVs for liver (15.57% ± 4.32 vs. 13.04% ± 3.51, Conclusion: The degradation of PET image quality due to a reduction in injected dose at the end of the
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.