Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 180

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Performance Measurement of the microPET Focus 120 Scanner

Open access
Kim, J. S., Lee, J. S., Im, K. C., Kim, S. J., Kim, S.-Y., Lee, D. S., Moon, D. H.·2007·Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The microPET Focus 120 scanner is a third-generation animal PET scanner dedicated to rodent imaging. Here, we report the results of scanner performance testing. METHODS: A (68)Ge point source was used to measure energy resolution, which was determined for each crystal and averaged. Spatial resolution was measured using a (22)Na point source with a nominal size of 0.25 mm at the system center and various off-center positions. Absolute sensitivity without attenuation was determined by extrapolating the data measured using an (18)F line source and multiple layers of absorbers. Scatter fraction and counting rate performance were measured using 2 different cylindric phantoms simulating rat and mouse bodies. Sensitivity, scatter fraction, and noise equivalent counting rate (NECR) experiments were repeated under 4 different conditions (energy window, 250 approximately 750 keV or 350 approximately 650 keV; coincidence window, 6 or 10 ns). A performance phantom with hot-rod inserts of various sizes was scanned, and several animal studies were also performed. RESULTS: Energy resolution at a 511-keV photopeak was 18.3% on average. Radial, tangential, and axial resolution of images reconstructed with the Fourier rebinning (FORE) and filtered backprojection (FBP) algorithms were 1.18 (radial), 1.13 (tangential), and 1.45 mm full width at half maximum (FWHM) (axial) at center and 2.35 (radial), 1.66 (tangential), and 2.00 mm FWHM (axial) at a radial offset of 2 cm. Absolute sensitivities at transaxial and axial centers were 7.0% (250 approximately 750 keV, 10 ns), 6.7% (250 approximately 750 keV, 6 ns), 4.0% (350 approximately 650 keV, 10 ns), and 3.8% (350 approximately 650 keV, 6 ns). Scatter fractions were 15.9% (mouse phantom) and 35.0% (rat phantom) for 250 approximately 750 keV and 6 ns. Peak NECR was 869 kcps at 3,242 kBq/mL (mouse phantom) and 228 kcps at 290 kBq/mL (rat phantom) at 250 approximately 750 keV and 6 ns. Hot-rod inserts of 1.6-mm diameter were clearly identified, and animal studies illustrated the feasibility of this system for studies of whole rodents and mid-sized animal brains. CONCLUSION: The results of this independent field test showed the improved physical characteristics of the F120 scanner over the previous microPET series systems. This system will be useful for imaging studies on small rodents and brains of larger animals.

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 · 10.2967/jnumed.107.040550

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
Kim, J. S., Lee, J. S., Im, K. C., Kim, S. J., Kim, S.-Y., Lee, D. S., & Moon, D. H.
Venue
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Published
2007-08-17
Volume
48
Issue
9
Pages
1527-1535
ISSN
0161-5505 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2137277859
Cited by
180
References
0
FWCI
14.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Performance Measurement of the microPET Focus 120 Scanner. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2967/jnumed.107.040550
The paper
Kim, J. S., Lee, J. S., Im, K. C., Kim, S. J., Kim, S.-Y., Lee, D. S., & Moon, D. H. (2007). Performance Measurement of the microPET Focus 120 Scanner. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.107.040550

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.