↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of dosimetry between PET/CT and PET alone using 11C-ITMM

Overview of attention for article published in Australasian Physical & Engineering Science in Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 111)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of dosimetry between PET/CT and PET alone using 11C-ITMM
Published in
Australasian Physical & Engineering Science in Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13246-015-0419-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimiteru Ito, Muneyuki Sakata, Keiichi Oda, Kei Wagatsuma, Jun Toyohara, Kenji Ishibashi, Kenji Ishii, Kiichi Ishiwata

Abstract

We used a new tracer, N-[4-[6-(isopropylamino) pyrimidin-4-yl]-1,3-thiazol-2-yl]-4-(11)C-methoxy-N-methylbenzamide ((11)C-ITMM), to compare radiation doses from positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) with previously published doses from PET alone. Twelve healthy volunteers [six males (mean age ± SD, 27.7 ± 6.7 years) and six females (31.8 ± 14.5 years)] in 12 examinations were recruited. Dose estimations from PET/CT were compared with those from PET alone. Regions of interest (ROIs) in PET/CT were delineated on the basis of low-dose CT (LD-CT) images acquired during PET/CT. Internal and external radiation doses were estimated using OLINDA/EXM 1.0 and CT-Expo software. The effective dose (ED) for (11)C-ITMM calculated from PET/CT was estimated to be 4.7 ± 0.5 μSv/MBq for the male subjects and 4.1 ± 0.7 μSv/MBq for the female subjects. The mean ED for (11)C-ITMM calculated from PET alone in a previous report was estimated to be 4.6 ± 0.3 μSv/MBq (males, n = 3). The ED values for (11)C-ITMM calculated from PET/CT in the male subjects were almost identical to those from PET alone. The absorbed doses (ADs) of the gallbladder, stomach, red bone marrow, and spleen calculated from PET/CT were significantly different from those calculated from PET alone. The EDs of (11)C-ITMM calculated from PET/CT were almost identical to those calculated from PET alone. The ADs in several organs calculated from PET/CT differed from those from PET alone. LD-CT images acquired during PET/CT may facilitate organ identification.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 33%
Researcher 1 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Librarian 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 17%
Engineering 1 17%

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 06 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,860,608
of 13,042,111 outputs
Outputs from Australasian Physical & Engineering Science in Medicine
#45
of 111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,618
of 358,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australasian Physical & Engineering Science in Medicine
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,042,111 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 111 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 358,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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