A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Assessment of the accuracy of a Bayesian estimation algorithm for perfusion CT by using a digital phantom. | LitMetric

Introduction: A new deconvolution algorithm, the Bayesian estimation algorithm, was reported to improve the precision of parametric maps created using perfusion computed tomography. However, it remains unclear whether quantitative values generated by this method are more accurate than those generated using optimized deconvolution algorithms of other software packages. Hence, we compared the accuracy of the Bayesian and deconvolution algorithms by using a digital phantom.

Methods: The digital phantom data, in which concentration-time curves reflecting various known values for cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), mean transit time (MTT), and tracer delays were embedded, were analyzed using the Bayesian estimation algorithm as well as delay-insensitive singular value decomposition (SVD) algorithms of two software packages that were the best benchmarks in a previous cross-validation study. Correlation and agreement of quantitative values of these algorithms with true values were examined.

Results: CBF, CBV, and MTT values estimated by all the algorithms showed strong correlations with the true values (r = 0.91-0.92, 0.97-0.99, and 0.91-0.96, respectively). In addition, the values generated by the Bayesian estimation algorithm for all of these parameters showed good agreement with the true values [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.90, 0.99, and 0.96, respectively], while MTT values from the SVD algorithms were suboptimal (ICC = 0.81-0.82).

Conclusions: Quantitative analysis using a digital phantom revealed that the Bayesian estimation algorithm yielded CBF, CBV, and MTT maps strongly correlated with the true values and MTT maps with better agreement than those produced by delay-insensitive SVD algorithms.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-013-1237-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bayesian estimation
20
estimation algorithm
20
true values
16
digital phantom
12
svd algorithms
12
values
10
accuracy bayesian
8
quantitative values
8
values generated
8
deconvolution algorithms
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!