MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969657967 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/52/5/020

Implementation of an iterative scatter correction, the influence of attenuation map quality and their effect on absolute quantitation in SPECT

2007· article· en· W1969657967 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Vandervoort, A. Ćeller, R. Harrop

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrection for attenuationAttenuationImaging phantomCollimatorIterative reconstructionImage qualitySingle-photon emission computed tomographyNuclear medicinePhysicsOpticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the accuracy of qSPECT, a quantitative SPECT reconstruction algorithm we have developed which employs corrections for collimator blurring, photon attenuation and scatter, and provides images in units of absolute radiotracer concentrations (kBq cm(-3)). Using simulated and experimental phantom data with characteristics similar to clinical cardiac perfusion data, we studied the implementation of a scatter correction (SC) as part of an iterative reconstruction protocol. Additionally, with experimental phantom studies we examined the influence of CT-based attenuation maps, relative to those obtained from conventional SPECT transmission scans, on SCs and quantitation. Our results indicate that the qSPECT estimated scatter corrections did not change appreciably after the third iteration of the reconstruction. For the simulated data, qSPECT concentrations agreed with images reconstructed using ideal, scatter-free, simulated data to within 6%. For the experimental data, we observed small systematic differences in the scatter fractions for data using different combinations of SCs and attenuation maps. The SCs were found to be significantly influenced by errors in image coregistration. The reconstructed concentrations using CT-based corrections were more quantitatively accurate than those using attenuation maps from conventional SPECT transmission scans. However, segmenting the attenuation maps from SPECT transmission scans could provide sufficient accuracy for most applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.347 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207