MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2537898985 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2009.5401707

A new approach in patient motion correction for cardiac SPECT: A simulation study

2009· article· en· W2537898985 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas A. Hughes, Sergey Shcherbinin, A. Ćeller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomVoxelArtificial intelligenceProjection (relational algebra)Computer scienceNuclear medicineIterative reconstructionComputer visionCorrection for attenuationStandard deviationMathematicsAlgorithmMedicinePositron emission tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient motion artifacts created in cardiac SPECT imaging can lead to misinterpretation of the images, resulting in false diagnoses. This simulation study proposes a new technique for patient motion correction (MC), where we utilize a modified template projection/reconstruction (TPR) algorithm to perform a voxel-by-voxel correction to the original image. Using NCAT, we developed two female phantoms with large breasts containing a non-beating heart (heart: background = 5:1). Phantom 1 had a healthy heart, and phantom 2 had a heart with a small (10%) perfusion defect in the lateral wall (severity = 50%). The SimSET code was used to perform simulations for both phantoms modeling cardiac SPECT acquisitions with Tc-99m, 128 × 128 matrix, and 60 camera stops. In addition to two standard (no motion) acquisitions (ST) for each phantom, seven acquisitions with different degrees of phantom motion were created by manually shifting a selected number of projections in a given direction (motion ranged from 8 to 22 mm). MC images (MCI) were created using a modified TPR, where the projected template was adjusted to match the motion detected in the experimental projections by aligning the center of mass in each projection. All reconstructions were performed using OSEM with resolution recovery and attenuation correction. For all simulated movements, the MCI images exhibited improvements in both standard deviation (SD) and mean accuracy relative to the uncorrected experimental reconstructions (ER). On average, the accuracies calculated for ER, MCI and the ST reconstructions were 68%, 77%, and 76%, respectively. The average SD for ER, MCI and the ST reconstructions were 5.2, 4.0, and 4.0, respectively. Our proposed technique offers a voxel-by-voxel motion correction, which provides improved image accuracy and standard deviation of counts relative to the uncorrected images and, in many cases, the images created without patient motion.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→