ArticleMedical physics2025
3D in-system calibration method for PET detectors.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uncertainty-aware gamma interaction localization and reconstruction in PET.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Beyond mechanics: Maximum-likelihood-driven PET detector alignment calibration.Medical physics · 2026Article
- 3D in-system calibration method for PET detectors.Medical 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLight-sharing detector designs for positron emission tomography (PET) systems have sparked interest in the scientific community. Particularly, (semi-)monoliths show generally good performance characteristics regarding 2D positioning, energy-, and timing resolution, as well as readout area. This is combined with intrinsic depth-of-interaction (DOI) capability to ensure a homogeneous spatial resolution across the entire field of view (FoV). However, complex positioning calibration processes limit their use in PET systems, especially in large-scale clinical systems. PURPOSE: This work proposes a new 3D positioning in-system calibration method for fast and convenient (re-)calibration and quality control of assembled PET scanners. The method targets all kinds of PET detectors that achieve the best performance with individual calibration, including complex segmented detector designs. The in-system calibration method is evaluated and empirically compared to a state-of-the-art fan-beam calibration for a small-diameter proof of concept (PoC) scanner. A simulation study evaluates the method's applicability to different scanner geometries.
methodsA PoC scanner geometry of 120 mm inner diameter and 150 mm axial extent was set up consisting of five identical finely segmented slab detectors (one detector under test and four collimation detectors). A
resultsWith a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.8 and 1.19 mm full-width at half maximum (FWHM) along the planar-monolithic slab dimension, the in-system methods performed similarly within 1% to the fan-beam collimator results. The DOI performance was at ∼90% with 1.13 mm MAE and 2.47 mm FWHM to the fan-beam collimator. Analytical calculations suggest an improved performance for larger scanner geometries.
conclusionThe functionality of the 3D in-system positioning calibration method was successfully demonstrated with the measurements within a PoC scanner configuration with similar positioning performance as the bench-top fan-beam setup. The in-system calibration method can be used to calibrate and test fully assembled PET systems to enable more complex light-sharing detector architectures in, for example, large PET systems with many detectors. The acquired data can further be used for more complex energy and time calibrations.
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.