↓ Skip to main content

Effective dose estimation for oncological and neurological PET/CT procedures

Overview of attention for article published in EJNMMI Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 312)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Effective dose estimation for oncological and neurological PET/CT procedures
Published in
EJNMMI Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13550-017-0272-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josep M. Martí-Climent, Elena Prieto, Verónica Morán, Lidia Sancho, Macarena Rodríguez-Fraile, Javier Arbizu, María J. García-Velloso, José A. Richter

Abstract

The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the patient effective dose (ED) for different PET/CT procedures performed with a variety of PET radiopharmaceutical compounds. PET/CT studies of 210 patients were reviewed including Torso (n = 123), Whole body (WB) (n = 36), Head and Neck Tumor (HNT) (n = 10), and Brain (n = 41) protocols with (18)FDG (n = 170), (11)C-CHOL (n = 10), (18)FDOPA (n = 10), (11)C-MET (n = 10), and (18)F-florbetapir (n = 10). ED was calculated using conversion factors applied to the radiotracer activity and to the CT dose-length product. Total ED (mean ± SD) for Torso-(11)C-CHOL, Torso-(18)FDG, WB-(18)FDG, and HNT-(18)FDG protocols were 13.5 ± 2.2, 16.5 ± 4.5, 20.0 ± 5.6, and 15.4 ± 2.8 mSv, respectively, where CT represented 77, 62, 69, and 63% of the protocol ED, respectively. For (18)FDG, (18)FDOPA, (11)C-MET, and (18)F-florbetapir brain PET/CT studies, ED values (mean ± SD) were 6.4 ± 0.6, 4.6 ± 0.4, 5.2 ± 0.5, and 9.1 ± 0.4 mSv, respectively, and the corresponding CT contributions were 11, 14, 23, and 26%, respectively. In (18)FDG PET/CT, variations in scan length and arm position produced significant differences in CT ED (p < 0.01). For dual-time-point imaging, the CT ED (mean ± SD) for the delayed scan was 3.8 ± 1.5 mSv. The mean ED for body and brain PET/CT protocols with different radiopharmaceuticals ranged between 4.6 and 20.0 mSv. The major contributor to total ED for body protocols is CT, whereas for brain studies, it is the PET radiopharmaceutical.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Other 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Physics and Astronomy 5 11%
Engineering 4 9%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 11 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 21 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,435,190
of 14,616,481 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#8
of 312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,161
of 264,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,616,481 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 312 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 264,144 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them