World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices
Twelve countries participated in the WHO intercomparison for which transmission CAP (College of American Pathologists) brain and CAP liver phantoms and emission London liver phantoms were used. A total of 157 imaging devices were tested. Overall results from the phantoms revealed a wide range of tar...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1985, Vol.10 (5-6), p.193-197 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 197 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5-6 |
| container_start_page | 193 |
| container_title | European Journal of Nuclear Medicine |
| container_volume | 10 |
| creator | VOLODIN, V SOUCHKEVITCH, G KASATKIN, Y PARAS, P MOULD, R RACOVEANU, N BERGMANN, H BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E DELALOYE, B DERMENTZOGLOU, F GEORGESCU, G HERRERA, N JASINKI, W |
| description | Twelve countries participated in the WHO intercomparison for which transmission CAP (College of American Pathologists) brain and CAP liver phantoms and emission London liver phantoms were used. A total of 157 imaging devices were tested. Overall results from the phantoms revealed a wide range of targets detected. For the CAP-phantoms target detectability dropped below 50% for target sizes less than 9 mm and below 60% for target contrast less than 0.84:1. On average one false positive and six false negative results were reported using CAP-brain phantoms and one false positive and one false negative result using CAP-liver phantoms. For the London liver phantoms containing the tissue equivalent rubber abdominal simulation the target of 1 cm was never visualised. Two targets in this phantom (2 cm and 2.5 cm) were correctly identified in 34% of studies and one of these targets in 52% of studies. Equivocal and false positive results were reported in 42%. The WHO inter-comparison demonstrated the need to establish new, or to improve the existing, quality control programmes. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/BF00254460 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_BF00254460</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>76061696</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-afe9163823671ec72e39379300b9f8c56aacf5453e6f0b1a985a878afd4b61d93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkMFq3DAQhkVpSLZpL70XdCg5FJxIli1ZxzQkTSGQS0qPZiyPNiqytJHkwr5AnzsqWZLTwPwfPzMfIZ85O-eMqYvvN4y1fddJ9o5suOS6UWzQ78mGiY41Umt1Qj7k_Icx1nWiPybHQg9KarUh_37H5Gf6iODLI41pC8FlKC4G6kLB1HiYYoIS056auOwguVyzXNZ5XwnK27peQ0kOM63B0wrelT3dYbIxLRAM0mhpWI1HSHTB2RkXkLoFti5s6Yx_ncH8kRxZ8Bk_HeYp-XVz_XB129zd__h5dXnXmLaVpQGLmksxtEIqjka1KLRQWjA2aTuYXgIY23e9QGnZxEEPPQxqADt3k-SzFqfk7KV3l-LTirmMi8sGvYeAcc2jkkxyqWUFv72AJsWcE9pxl-rNaT9yNv6XPr5Jr_CXQ-s61Q9f0YPlmn895JANeJuqFpdfMc2F6oUUz4foi4M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>76061696</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>VOLODIN, V ; SOUCHKEVITCH, G ; KASATKIN, Y ; PARAS, P ; MOULD, R ; RACOVEANU, N ; BERGMANN, H ; BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E ; DELALOYE, B ; DERMENTZOGLOU, F ; GEORGESCU, G ; HERRERA, N ; JASINKI, W</creator><creatorcontrib>VOLODIN, V ; SOUCHKEVITCH, G ; KASATKIN, Y ; PARAS, P ; MOULD, R ; RACOVEANU, N ; BERGMANN, H ; BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E ; DELALOYE, B ; DERMENTZOGLOU, F ; GEORGESCU, G ; HERRERA, N ; JASINKI, W</creatorcontrib><description>Twelve countries participated in the WHO intercomparison for which transmission CAP (College of American Pathologists) brain and CAP liver phantoms and emission London liver phantoms were used. A total of 157 imaging devices were tested. Overall results from the phantoms revealed a wide range of targets detected. For the CAP-phantoms target detectability dropped below 50% for target sizes less than 9 mm and below 60% for target contrast less than 0.84:1. On average one false positive and six false negative results were reported using CAP-brain phantoms and one false positive and one false negative result using CAP-liver phantoms. For the London liver phantoms containing the tissue equivalent rubber abdominal simulation the target of 1 cm was never visualised. Two targets in this phantom (2 cm and 2.5 cm) were correctly identified in 34% of studies and one of these targets in 52% of studies. Equivocal and false positive results were reported in 42%. The WHO inter-comparison demonstrated the need to establish new, or to improve the existing, quality control programmes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0340-6997</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1619-7089</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF00254460</identifier><identifier>PMID: 3987697</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EJNMD9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Springer</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Brain - diagnostic imaging ; Europe ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Laboratories - standards ; Liver - diagnostic imaging ; Medical sciences ; Models, Structural ; Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital - standards ; Quality Assurance, Health Care ; Radionuclide Imaging - instrumentation ; Radionuclide Imaging - standards ; Radionuclide investigations ; United States ; World Health Organization</subject><ispartof>European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 1985, Vol.10 (5-6), p.193-197</ispartof><rights>1985 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-afe9163823671ec72e39379300b9f8c56aacf5453e6f0b1a985a878afd4b61d93</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,4012,27912,27913,27914</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=9137536$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3987697$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>VOLODIN, V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SOUCHKEVITCH, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KASATKIN, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PARAS, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MOULD, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RACOVEANU, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BERGMANN, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DELALOYE, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DERMENTZOGLOU, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GEORGESCU, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HERRERA, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JASINKI, W</creatorcontrib><title>World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices</title><title>European Journal of Nuclear Medicine</title><addtitle>Eur J Nucl Med</addtitle><description>Twelve countries participated in the WHO intercomparison for which transmission CAP (College of American Pathologists) brain and CAP liver phantoms and emission London liver phantoms were used. A total of 157 imaging devices were tested. Overall results from the phantoms revealed a wide range of targets detected. For the CAP-phantoms target detectability dropped below 50% for target sizes less than 9 mm and below 60% for target contrast less than 0.84:1. On average one false positive and six false negative results were reported using CAP-brain phantoms and one false positive and one false negative result using CAP-liver phantoms. For the London liver phantoms containing the tissue equivalent rubber abdominal simulation the target of 1 cm was never visualised. Two targets in this phantom (2 cm and 2.5 cm) were correctly identified in 34% of studies and one of these targets in 52% of studies. Equivocal and false positive results were reported in 42%. The WHO inter-comparison demonstrated the need to establish new, or to improve the existing, quality control programmes.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Brain - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Laboratories - standards</subject><subject>Liver - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Models, Structural</subject><subject>Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care</subject><subject>Radionuclide Imaging - instrumentation</subject><subject>Radionuclide Imaging - standards</subject><subject>Radionuclide investigations</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>World Health Organization</subject><issn>0340-6997</issn><issn>1619-7089</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1985</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkMFq3DAQhkVpSLZpL70XdCg5FJxIli1ZxzQkTSGQS0qPZiyPNiqytJHkwr5AnzsqWZLTwPwfPzMfIZ85O-eMqYvvN4y1fddJ9o5suOS6UWzQ78mGiY41Umt1Qj7k_Icx1nWiPybHQg9KarUh_37H5Gf6iODLI41pC8FlKC4G6kLB1HiYYoIS056auOwguVyzXNZ5XwnK27peQ0kOM63B0wrelT3dYbIxLRAM0mhpWI1HSHTB2RkXkLoFti5s6Yx_ncH8kRxZ8Bk_HeYp-XVz_XB129zd__h5dXnXmLaVpQGLmksxtEIqjka1KLRQWjA2aTuYXgIY23e9QGnZxEEPPQxqADt3k-SzFqfk7KV3l-LTirmMi8sGvYeAcc2jkkxyqWUFv72AJsWcE9pxl-rNaT9yNv6XPr5Jr_CXQ-s61Q9f0YPlmn895JANeJuqFpdfMc2F6oUUz4foi4M</recordid><startdate>1985</startdate><enddate>1985</enddate><creator>VOLODIN, V</creator><creator>SOUCHKEVITCH, G</creator><creator>KASATKIN, Y</creator><creator>PARAS, P</creator><creator>MOULD, R</creator><creator>RACOVEANU, N</creator><creator>BERGMANN, H</creator><creator>BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E</creator><creator>DELALOYE, B</creator><creator>DERMENTZOGLOU, F</creator><creator>GEORGESCU, G</creator><creator>HERRERA, N</creator><creator>JASINKI, W</creator><general>Springer</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1985</creationdate><title>World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices</title><author>VOLODIN, V ; SOUCHKEVITCH, G ; KASATKIN, Y ; PARAS, P ; MOULD, R ; RACOVEANU, N ; BERGMANN, H ; BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E ; DELALOYE, B ; DERMENTZOGLOU, F ; GEORGESCU, G ; HERRERA, N ; JASINKI, W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-afe9163823671ec72e39379300b9f8c56aacf5453e6f0b1a985a878afd4b61d93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1985</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Brain - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Laboratories - standards</topic><topic>Liver - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Models, Structural</topic><topic>Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care</topic><topic>Radionuclide Imaging - instrumentation</topic><topic>Radionuclide Imaging - standards</topic><topic>Radionuclide investigations</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>World Health Organization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>VOLODIN, V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SOUCHKEVITCH, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KASATKIN, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PARAS, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MOULD, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RACOVEANU, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BERGMANN, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DELALOYE, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DERMENTZOGLOU, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GEORGESCU, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HERRERA, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JASINKI, W</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European Journal of Nuclear Medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>VOLODIN, V</au><au>SOUCHKEVITCH, G</au><au>KASATKIN, Y</au><au>PARAS, P</au><au>MOULD, R</au><au>RACOVEANU, N</au><au>BERGMANN, H</au><au>BUSEMANN-SOKOLE, E</au><au>DELALOYE, B</au><au>DERMENTZOGLOU, F</au><au>GEORGESCU, G</au><au>HERRERA, N</au><au>JASINKI, W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices</atitle><jtitle>European Journal of Nuclear Medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Nucl Med</addtitle><date>1985</date><risdate>1985</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>5-6</issue><spage>193</spage><epage>197</epage><pages>193-197</pages><issn>0340-6997</issn><eissn>1619-7089</eissn><coden>EJNMD9</coden><abstract>Twelve countries participated in the WHO intercomparison for which transmission CAP (College of American Pathologists) brain and CAP liver phantoms and emission London liver phantoms were used. A total of 157 imaging devices were tested. Overall results from the phantoms revealed a wide range of targets detected. For the CAP-phantoms target detectability dropped below 50% for target sizes less than 9 mm and below 60% for target contrast less than 0.84:1. On average one false positive and six false negative results were reported using CAP-brain phantoms and one false positive and one false negative result using CAP-liver phantoms. For the London liver phantoms containing the tissue equivalent rubber abdominal simulation the target of 1 cm was never visualised. Two targets in this phantom (2 cm and 2.5 cm) were correctly identified in 34% of studies and one of these targets in 52% of studies. Equivocal and false positive results were reported in 42%. The WHO inter-comparison demonstrated the need to establish new, or to improve the existing, quality control programmes.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>3987697</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF00254460</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0340-6997 |
| ispartof | European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 1985, Vol.10 (5-6), p.193-197 |
| issn | 0340-6997 1619-7089 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_BF00254460 |
| source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Brain - diagnostic imaging Europe Humans Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Laboratories - standards Liver - diagnostic imaging Medical sciences Models, Structural Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital - standards Quality Assurance, Health Care Radionuclide Imaging - instrumentation Radionuclide Imaging - standards Radionuclide investigations United States World Health Organization |
| title | World health organisation inter-laboratory comparison study in 12 countries on quality performance of nuclear medicine imaging devices |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T09%3A21%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=World%20health%20organisation%20inter-laboratory%20comparison%20study%20in%2012%20countries%20on%20quality%20performance%20of%20nuclear%20medicine%20imaging%20devices&rft.jtitle=European%20Journal%20of%20Nuclear%20Medicine&rft.au=VOLODIN,%20V&rft.date=1985&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=5-6&rft.spage=193&rft.epage=197&rft.pages=193-197&rft.issn=0340-6997&rft.eissn=1619-7089&rft.coden=EJNMD9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF00254460&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E76061696%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=76061696&rft_id=info:pmid/3987697&rfr_iscdi=true |