Cited by 863Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsNumerical methods in inverse problemsImage and Signal Denoising Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Statistical Model for Positron Emission Tomography

Vardi, Y., Shepp, L. A., Kaufman, L.·1985·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET)—still in its research stages—is a technique that promises to open new medical frontiers by enabling physicians to study the metabolic activity of the body in a pictorial manner. Much as in X-ray transmission tomography and other modes of computerized tomography, the quality of the reconstructed image in PET is very sensitive to the mathematical algorithm to be used for reconstruction. In this article, we tailor a mathematical model to the physics of positron emissions, and we use the model to describe the basic image reconstruction problem of PET as a standard problem in statistical estimation from incomplete data. We describe various estimation procedures, such as the maximum likelihood (ML) method (using the EM algorithm), the method of moments, and the least squares method. A computer simulation of a PET experiment is then used to demonstrate the ML and the least squares reconstructions. The main purposes of this article are to report on what we believe is an important contribution of statistics to PET and to familiarize statisticians with this exciting field that can benefit from further statistical methodologies to be developed with PET problems in mind. Thus no background in physics or previous knowledge of computerized tomography is assumed. The emphasis is on the basic PET model and the statistical methodology needed for it.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.1985.10477119

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lakshminarayanan , A. V. 1975 . “Reconstruction From Divergent Ray Data,” , State University of New York at Buffalo, Computer Science Dept. . Technical Report No. 92
  2. Peng , J. C. M. 1975 . “Simultaneous Estimation of the Parameters of Independent Poisson Distributions,” , Stanford University, Dept. of Statistics . Technical Report No. 78

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Vardi, Y., Shepp, L. A., & Kaufman, L.
Affiliations
AT&T (United States) (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
1985-03
Volume
80
Issue
389
Pages
8-20
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W1967374611
Cited by
863
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 27
FWCI
13.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of the American Statistical Association (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Mathematical Physics › Numerical methods in inverse problems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
Keywords
positron emission tomography, image reconstruction, statistical models, missing data, maximum likelihood estimation, expectation-maximization algorithm, method of moments, least squares, statistical estimation

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