ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Calibration and count rate performance of NaI(Tl) gamma counters for quantifying the activity
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantification of low activity samples using gamma counters is a common technique when investigating the biodistribution of experimental radiopharmaceuticals. Several human and pre-clinical trials have investigated PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate both the counting efficiency and the effect of count rate losses on the quantitation of activity for
methodsSources of known activity (initially 78.3 kBq) were measured in a gamma counter as they decayed over approximately 15 days. Observed count rates were fit with a paralyzable detector model for two separate energy windows, 511 keV ± 10% and 909 keV ± 10%, as well as their sum. Counting efficiency in the absence of losses as well as the effective deadtime for each dataset were calculated.
resultsCount rates for each energy window were well fit with a paralyzable model with R
conclusionCounting efficiency and count rate performance for
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.