MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030464110 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/15/4755

Quantitative image reconstruction for dual-isotope parathyroid SPECT/CT: phantom experiments and sample patient studies

2012· article· en· W2030464110 on OpenAlexaff
Sergey Shcherbinin, S Chamoiseau, A. Ćeller

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomSingle-photon emission computed tomographyNuclear medicineAttenuationEmission computed tomographyProjection (relational algebra)Spect imagingCorrection for attenuationTomographyPhysicsComputer scienceOpticsMedicinePositron emission tomographyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the quantitative accuracy of the model-based dual-isotope single-photon emission computed tomography (DI-SPECT) reconstructions that use Klein-Nishina expressions to estimate the scattered photon contributions to the projection data. Our objective was to examine the ability of the method to recover the absolute activities pertaining to both radiotracers: Tc-99m and I-123. We validated our method through a series of phantom experiments performed using a clinical hybrid SPECT/CT camera (Infinia Hawkeye, GE Healthcare). Different activity ratios and different attenuating media were used in these experiments to create cross-talk effects of varying severity, which can occur in clinical studies. Accurate model-based corrections for scatter and cross-talk with CT attenuation maps allowed for the recovery of the absolute activities from DI-SPECT/CT scans with errors that ranged 0-10% for both radiotracers. The unfavorable activity ratios increased the computational burden but practically did not affect the resulting accuracy. The visual analysis of parathyroid patient data demonstrated that our model-based processing improved adenoma/background contrast and enhanced localization of small or faint adenomas.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.368
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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