ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2026
Examination of simple artificial intelligence-based analysis of dopamine transporter scintigraphy for supporting a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease.
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn the Movement Disorder Society criteria for the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease (PD), evaluation of the presynaptic dopamine system should be performed using dopamine transporter single-photon emission computed tomography (DAT SPECT). However, it is difficult for unexperienced physicians to detect a mild defect. Here, we attempted to develop a simple deep learning-based image analysis method to evaluate DAT SPECT images.
methodsWe used data from 300 patients who were diagnosed with PD and 102 control patients with non-neurodegenerative diseases as the artificial intelligence (AI) development cohort. For validation, we analyzed the data of 96 patients with PD from an independent cohort. We divided the development cohort into the training and test sets. Using the training set, we performed transfer learning using six pre-trained convolutional neural network architectures, and created AI models. We evaluated their accuracy, sensitivity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and further confirmed their validity by using the validation cohort. In addition, we compared the accuracy of the best AI model with that of two experienced neurologists and a resident.
resultsThe selected AI model could interpret DAT SPECT images with an accuracy of 0.959; accuracy in the validation cohort was 0.8959-1. There was no significant difference between the accuracy of the AI model and physicians.
conclusionOur simple AI model for the interpretation of DAT SPECT images was accurate and robust. Its accuracy was equivalent to that of physicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41296269What 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.