Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38488989›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2024

Reduction of [

Christina P W Cox, Tessa Brabander, Erik Vegt, Quido G de Lussanet de la Sablonière, Laura H Graven, Frederik A Verburg, Marcel Segbers

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Christina P W CoxDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. c.cox@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5313-6727
Tessa BrabanderDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8000-6490
Erik VegtDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7456-2258
Quido G de Lussanet de la SablonièreDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9779-8682
Laura H GravenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-1948-9383
Frederik A VerburgDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1401-1993
Marcel SegbersDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4866-3984

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew digital detectors and block-sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstruction algorithm improve positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) image quality. The impact on image quality may differ from analogue PET/computed tomography (CT) protocol. The aim of this study is to determine the potential reduction of injected [

methodsNEMA IQ phantom data and 25 patients scheduled for a diagnostic PET/MR were included. According to our current protocol, 1.5 MBq [

resultsPhantom analysis resulted in a possible injected activity reduction of 50% with factor β = 600. Quantitative analysis of patient images revealed a possible injected activity reduction of 67% with factor β = 600. Both with equal or improved image quality as compared to PET/CT. However, based on visual scoring a maximum activity reduction of 33% with factor β = 450 was acceptable, which was further limited by lesion detectability analysis to an injected activity reduction of 17% with factor β = 450.

conclusionA digital [

Indexed as

Block-sequential regularized expectation maximizationBSREMGallium Ga 68 dotatateImage qualityNeuroendocrine tumourPET/MRIPositron emission tomographyPositron emission tomography computed tomography

Identifiers

PMID38488989
PMCPMC11266332

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.