Premium
P2–282: Quality assurance in a multi–center PET imaging trial
Author(s) -
Foster Norman L.,
Koeppe Robert A.,
Heidibrink Judith L.,
Stevenson Valerie,
VanHuysen Carol
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1016/j.jalz.2006.05.1121
Subject(s) - quality assurance , medical physics , standard deviation , protocol (science) , image quality , clinical trial , quality (philosophy) , medicine , data quality , nuclear medicine , computer science , artificial intelligence , statistics , operations management , image (mathematics) , engineering , mathematics , philosophy , external quality assessment , alternative medicine , epistemology , pathology , metric (unit)
no evidence for a difference in mean hippocampal atrophy rates between manual and fluid methods. Reliability for hippocampal atrophy rates derived by regional fluid registration (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC): forward: left: 0.985; right: 0.988 and backward: left: 0.975; right: 0.989) was higher than for manual delineation (ICC: left: 0.798; right: 0.850). Conclusion: Regional fluid registration proved to be more reliable than manual delineation in assessing hippocampal atrophy rates, without sacrificing sensitivity to change. This method may be useful to quantify hippocampal volume change, especially in multi-center clinical trials, given the reduction in operator time and improved precision.