ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2025
Enhancing
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- PreoperativeTranslational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Determinants of diagnostic yield and scan quality of [Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
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
backgroundAs body mass index (BMI) increases, the quality of 2-deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose (
methods150 patients underwent
resultsDPL produced superior PET image quality compared to OSEM across all BMI groups. The visual quality of DPL showed a slight decline with increasing BMI, while OSEM exhibited a more significant decline. DPL maintained a stable [Formula: see text] across BMI increases, whereas OSEM exhibited increased noise. In the DPL group, quantitative image quality for overweight patients matched that of normal patients with minimal variance from underweight patients. In contrast, OSEM demonstrated significant declines in quantitative image quality with rising BMI. DPL yielded significantly higher contrast ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text],[Formula: see text]) and [Formula: see text] than OSEM for all lesions across all BMI categories.
conclusionDPL consistently provided superior image quality and lesion diagnostic performance compared to OSEM across all BMI categories in
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.