↓ Skip to main content

Point-spread function reconstructed PET images of sub-centimeter lesions are not quantitative

Overview of attention for article published in EJNMMI Physics, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 181)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Point-spread function reconstructed PET images of sub-centimeter lesions are not quantitative
Published in
EJNMMI Physics, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40658-016-0169-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

O. L. Munk, L. P. Tolbod, S. B. Hansen, T. V. Bogsrud

Abstract

PET image reconstruction methods include modeling of resolution degrading phenomena, often referred to as point-spread function (PSF) reconstruction. The aim of this study was to develop a clinically relevant phantom and characterize the reproducibility and accuracy of high-resolution PSF reconstructed images of small lesions, which is a prerequisite for using PET in the prediction and evaluation of responses to treatment. Sets of small homogeneous (18)F-spheres (range 3-12 mm diameter, relevant for small lesions and lymph nodes) were suspended and covered by a (11)C-silicone, which provided a scattering medium and a varying sphere-to-background ratio. Repeated measurements were made on PET/CT scanners from two vendors using a wide range of reconstruction parameters. Recovery coefficients (RCs) were measured for clinically used volume-of-interest definitions. For non-PSF images, RCs were reproducible and fell monotonically as the sphere diameter decreased, which is the expected behavior. PSF images converged slower and had artifacts: RCs did not fall monotonically as sphere diameters decreased but had a maximum RC for sphere sizes around 8 mm, RCs could be greater than 1, and RCs were less reproducible. To some degree, post-reconstruction filters could suppress PSF artifacts. High-resolution PSF images of small lesions showed artifacts that could lead to serious misinterpretations when used for monitoring treatment response. Thus, it could be safer to use non-PSF reconstruction for quantitative purposes unless PSF reconstruction parameters are optimized for the specific task.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Other 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Engineering 13 16%
Physics and Astronomy 12 15%
Computer Science 4 5%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 21 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 June 2019.
All research outputs
#13,292,187
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Physics
#46
of 181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,219
of 421,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Physics
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 181 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.