↓ Skip to main content

Guidelines for quality control of PET/CT scans in a multicenter clinical study

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

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 190)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Guidelines for quality control of PET/CT scans in a multicenter clinical study
Published in
EJNMMI Physics, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40658-017-0190-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ivalina Hristova, Ronald Boellaard, Paul Galette, Lalitha K. Shankar, Yan Liu, Sigrid Stroobants, Otto S. Hoekstra, Wim J.G. Oyen

Abstract

To date, there is no published detailed checklist with parameters referencing the DICOM tag information with respect to the quality control (QC) of PET/CT scans. The aims of these guidelines are to provide the know-how for effectively controlling the quality of PET/CT scans in multicenter studies, to standardize the QC, to give sponsors and regulatory agencies a basis for justification of the data quality when using standardized uptake values as an imaging biomarker, to document the compliance with the imaging guidelines, to verify the per protocol population versus intent to treat population, and to safeguard the validity of multicenter study conclusions employing standardized uptake value (SUV) as an imaging biomarker which is paramount to the scientific community. Following the proposed guidelines will ensure standardized prospective imaging QC of scans applicable to most studies where SUVs are used as an imaging biomarker. The multitude of factors affecting SUV measurements when not controlled inflicts noise on the data. Decisions on patient management with substantial noise would be devastating to patients, ultimately undermine treatment outcome, and invalidate the utility of SUV as an imaging biomarker usefulness. Strict control of the data quality used for the validation of SUV as an imaging biomarker would ensure trust and reliability of the data.

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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Physics and Astronomy 4 9%
Engineering 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 20 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 November 2018.
All research outputs
#13,901,936
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Physics
#50
of 190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,907
of 319,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Physics
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 190 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 319,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 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