Cited by 247Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Reducing between scanner differences in multi-center PET studies

Open access
Joshi, Aniket, Koeppe, Robert A., Fessler, Jeffrey A.·2009·NeuroImage

Abstract

This work is part of the multi-center Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), a large multi-site study of dementia, including patients having mild cognitive impairment (MCI), probable Alzheimer's disease (AD), as well as healthy elderly controls. A major portion of ADNI involves the use of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) with positron emission tomography (PET). The objective of this paper is reduction of inter-scanner differences in the FDG-PET scans obtained from the 50 participating PET centers having fifteen different scanner models. In spite of a standardized imaging protocol, systematic inter-scanner variability in PET images from various sites is observed primarily due to differences in scanner resolution, reconstruction techniques, and different implementations of scatter and attenuation corrections. Two correction steps were developed by comparison of 3-D Hoffman brain phantom scans with the ‘gold standard’ digital 3-D Hoffman brain phantom: i) high frequency correction; where a smoothing kernel for each scanner model was estimated to smooth all images to a common resolution and ii) low frequency correction; where smooth affine correction factors were obtained to reduce the attenuation and scatter correction errors. For the phantom data, the high frequency correction reduced the variability by 20%-50% and the low frequency correction further reduced the differences by another 20%-25%. Correction factors obtained from phantom studies were applied to 95 scans from normal control subjects obtained from the participating sites. The high frequency correction reduced differences similar to the phantom studies. However, the low frequency correction did not further reduce differences; hence further refinement of the procedure is necessary.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.057

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 6 · Cited by 247

Authors
Joshi, A., Koeppe, R. A., & Fessler, J. A.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Koeppe, Robert A.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-05-15
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
154-159
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2140652743
Cited by
247
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01ag024904-10)
  • National Institute on Aging (U01-AG-024904, AG 024904, U19AG010483, U19AG024904)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
inter-scanner variability, FDG-PET, smooth kernels, attenuation correction, scatter correction, Hoffman brain phantom, Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment, ADNI, image registration
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Phantoms, Imaging, Radiopharmaceuticals, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review