Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 515

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners

Kinahan, Paul E., Hasegawa, Bruce H., Beyer, Thomas·2003·Seminars in Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

A synergy of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scanners is the use of the CT data for x-ray-based attenuation correction of the PET emission data. Current methods of measuring transmission use positron sources, gamma-ray sources, or x-ray sources. Each of the types of transmission scans involves different trade-offs of noise versus bias, with positron transmission scans having the highest noise but lowest bias, whereas x-ray scans have negligible noise but the potential for increased quantitative errors. The use of x-ray-based attenuation correction, however, has other advantages, including a lack of bias introduced from post-injection transmission scanning, which is an important practical consideration for clinical scanners, as well as reduced scan times. The sensitivity of x-ray-based attenuation correction to artifacts and quantitative errors depends on the method of translating the CT image from the effective x-ray energy of approximately 70 keV to attenuation coefficients at the PET energy of 511 keV. These translation methods are usually based on segmentation and/or scaling techniques. Errors in the PET emission image arise from positional mismatches caused by patient motion or respiration differences between the PET and CT scans; incorrect calculation of attenuation coefficients for CT contrast agents or metallic implants; or keeping the patient's arms in the field of view, which leads to truncation and/or beam-hardening (or x-ray scatter) artifacts. Proper interpretation of PET emission images corrected for attenuation by using the CT image relies on an understanding of the potential artifacts. In cases where an artifact or bias is suspected, careful inspection of all three available images (CT and PET emission with and without attenuation correction) is recommended.

Overview

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 · 10.1053/snuc.2003.127307

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 515

Metadata

Authors
Kinahan, P. E., Hasegawa, B. H., & Beyer, T.
Venue
Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-07
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
166-179
ISSN
0001-2998 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126639779
Cited by
515
References
3
FWCI
19.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/snuc.2003.127307
The paper
Kinahan, P. E., Hasegawa, B. H., & Beyer, T. (2003). X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1053/snuc.2003.127307

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.