{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T17:15:31Z","timestamp":1790270131484,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":46,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]],"date-time":"2021-01-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1609891200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]],"date-time":"2021-01-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1609891200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["EJNMMI Phys"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Digital PET involving silicon photomultipliers (SiPM) provides an enhanced time-of-flight (TOF) resolution as compared with photomultiplier (PMT)-based PET, but also a better prevention of the count-related rises in dead time and pile-up effects mainly due to smaller trigger domains (i.e., the detection surfaces associated with each trigger circuit). This study aimed to determine whether this latter property could help prevent against deteriorations in TOF resolution and TOF image quality in the wide range of PET count rates documented in clinical routine.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Variations, according to count rates, in timing resolution and in TOF-related enhancement of the quality of phantom images were compared between the first fully digital PET (Vereos) and a PMT-based PET (Ingenuity). Single-count rate values were additionally extracted from the list-mode data of routine analog- and digital-PET exams at each 500-ms interval, in order to determine the ranges of routine PET count rates.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Routine PET count rates were lower for the Vereos than for the Ingenuity. For Ingenuity, the upper limits were estimated at approximately 21.7 and 33.2 Mcps after injection of respectively 3 and 5 MBq.kg<jats:sup>-1<\/jats:sup> of current <jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F-labeled tracers. At 5.8 Mcps, corresponding to the lower limit of the routine count rates documented with the Ingenuity, timing resolutions provided by the scatter phantom were 326 and 621 ps for Vereos and Ingenuity, respectively. At higher count rates, timing resolution was remarkably stable for Vereos but exhibited a progressive deterioration for Ingenuity, respectively reaching 732 and 847 ps at the upper limits of 21.7 and 33.2 Mcps. The averaged TOF-related gain in signal\/noise ratio was stable at approximately 2 for Vereos but decreased from 1.36 at 5.8 Mcps to 1.14 and 1.00 at respectively 21.7 and 33.2 Mcps for Ingenuity.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Contrary to the Ingenuity PMT-based PET, the Vereos fully digital PET is unaffected by any deterioration in TOF resolution and consequently, in the quality of TOF images, in the wide range of routine PET count rates. This advantage is even more striking with higher count-rates for which the preferential use of digital PET should be further recommended (i.e., dynamic PET recording, higher injected activities).<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]],"date-time":"2021-01-06T18:06:31Z","timestamp":1609956391000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":22,"title":["Fully digital PET is unaffected by any deterioration in TOF resolution and TOF image quality in the wide range of routine PET count rates"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"8","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3823-2531","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Julien","family":"Salvadori","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Freddy","family":"Odille","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Gilles","family":"Karcher","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Pierre-Yves","family":"Marie","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Laetitia","family":"Imbert","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]]},"reference":[{"key":"344_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rausch I, Ruiz A, Valverde-Pascual I, Cal-Gonzalez J, Beyer T, Carrio I. Performance evaluation of the Philips Vereos PET\/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. J Nucl Med. 2018;60:561\u20137.","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.118.215541"},{"key":"344_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Reddin JS, Scheuermann JS, Bharkhada D, et al. Performance evaluation of the SiPM-based Siemens biograph vision PET\/CT system. Sydney: IEEE; 2018. p. 1\u20135.","DOI":"10.1109\/NSSMIC.2018.8824710"},{"key":"344_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Pan T, Einstein SA, Kappadath SC, et al. Performance evaluation of the 5-ring GE discovery MI PET\/CT system using the national electrical manufacturers association NU 2-2012 standard. Med Phys. 2019:mp.13576.","DOI":"10.1002\/mp.13576"},{"key":"344_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"8","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-019-0244-0","volume":"6","author":"D Vandendriessche","year":"2019","unstructured":"Vandendriessche D, Uribe J, Bertin H, De Geeter F. Performance characteristics of silicon photomultiplier based 15-cm AFOV TOF PET\/CT. EJNMMI Phys. 2019;6:8.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"301","DOI":"10.1097\/RLU.0000000000002483","volume":"44","author":"J Salvadori","year":"2019","unstructured":"Salvadori J, Perrin M, Marie P-Y, Imbert L, Verger A. High-resolution brain 18F-FDG images provided by fully digital PET. Clin Nucl Med. 2019;44:301\u20132.","journal-title":"Clin Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"61","DOI":"10.1186\/s13550-019-0526-5","volume":"9","author":"J Salvadori","year":"2019","unstructured":"Salvadori J, Imbert L, Perrin M, et al. Head-to-head comparison of image quality between brain 18F-FDG images recorded with a fully digital versus a last-generation analog PET camera. EJNMMI Res. 2019;9:61.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Res"},{"key":"344_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1378","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.114.148338","volume":"56","author":"NC Nguyen","year":"2015","unstructured":"Nguyen NC, Vercher-Conejero JL, Sattar A, et al. Image quality and diagnostic performance of a digital PET prototype in patients with oncologic diseases: initial experience and comparison with analog PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1378\u201385.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-019-0269-4","volume":"7","author":"S Gnesin","year":"2020","unstructured":"Gnesin S, Kieffer C, Zeimpekis K, et al. Phantom-based image quality assessment of clinical 18F-FDG protocols in digital PET\/CT and comparison to conventional PMT-based PET\/CT. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:1.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"11","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-020-0281-8","volume":"7","author":"J Salvadori","year":"2020","unstructured":"Salvadori J, Odille F, Verger A, et al. Head-to-head comparison between digital and analog PET of human and phantom images when optimized for maximizing the signal-to-noise ratio from small lesions. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:11.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.119.227801","volume":"61","author":"J van Sluis","year":"2020","unstructured":"van Sluis J, Boellaard R, Somasundaram A, et al. Image quality and semiquantitative measurements on the biograph vision PET\/CT system: initial experiences and comparison with the biograph mCT. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:129\u201335.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1155\/2017\/5260305","volume":"2017","author":"CL Wright","year":"2017","unstructured":"Wright CL, Binzel K, Zhang J, Knopp MV. Advanced functional tumor imaging and precision nuclear medicine enabled by digital PET technologies. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2017;2017:1\u20137.","journal-title":"Contrast Media Mol Imaging"},{"key":"344_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Fuentes-Ocampo F, L\u00f3pez-Mora DA, Flotats A, et al. Digital vs. analog PET\/CT: intra-subject comparison of the SUVmax in target lesions and reference regions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:1745\u201350.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-018-4256-0"},{"key":"344_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Surti S, Viswanath V, Daube-Witherspoom ME, Conti M, Casey ME, Karp JS. Benefit of improved performance with state-of-the art digital PET\/CT for lesion detection in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2020;42:462\u2013570.","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.120.242305"},{"key":"344_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Koopman D, van Dalen JA, Stevens H, Slump CH, Knollema S, Jager PL. Performance of digital PET compared to high-resolution conventional PET in patients with cancer. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:1448\u201354.","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.119.238105"},{"key":"344_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Zhang J, Maniawski P, Knopp MV. Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET\/CT system. EJNMMI Res. 2018;8:97.","DOI":"10.1186\/s13550-018-0448-7"},{"key":"344_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"29","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-018-0229-4","volume":"5","author":"L Huo","year":"2018","unstructured":"Huo L, Li N, Wu H, et al. Performance evaluation of a new high-sensitivity time-of-flight clinical PET\/CT system. EJNMMI Phys. 2018;5:29.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1188","DOI":"10.1109\/TNS.2006.875066","volume":"53","author":"M Conti","year":"2006","unstructured":"Conti M. Effect of randoms on signal-to-noise-ratio in TOF PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2006;53:1188\u201393.","journal-title":"IEEE Trans Nucl Sci"},{"key":"344_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"98","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.114.145029","volume":"56","author":"S Surti","year":"2015","unstructured":"Surti S. Update on time-of-flight PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:98\u2013105.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR19","first-page":"391P","volume":"47","author":"J Griesmer","year":"2006","unstructured":"Griesmer J, Laurence T, Cooke S, Karp J, Perkins A, Kolthammer J. Time-of-flight quality control for a new Philips Gemini PET\/CT scanner. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:391P.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Frach T, Prescher G, Degenhardt C, de Gruyter R, Schmitz A, Ballizany R. The digital silicon photomultiplier-principle of operation and intrinsic detector performance. Orlando; 2009. p. 2383\u20136.","DOI":"10.1109\/NSSMIC.2009.5402143"},{"key":"344_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1546","DOI":"10.1016\/j.phpro.2012.03.749","volume":"37","author":"Y Haemisch","year":"2012","unstructured":"Haemisch Y, Frach T, Degenhardt C, Thon A. Fully digital arrays of silicon photomultipliers (dSiPM) \u2013 a scalable alternative to vacuum photomultiplier tubes (PMT). Phys Procedia. 2012;37:1546\u201360.","journal-title":"Phys Procedia"},{"key":"344_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1016\/j.nima.2014.10.020","volume":"787","author":"S Gundacker","year":"2015","unstructured":"Gundacker S, Auffray E, Jarron P, Meyer T, Lecoq P. On the comparison of analog and digital SiPM readout in terms of expected timing performance. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect Accel Spectrometers Detect Assoc Equip. 2015;787:6\u201311.","journal-title":"Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect Accel Spectrometers Detect Assoc Equip"},{"key":"344_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"31","DOI":"10.1016\/j.nima.2015.10.078","volume":"809","author":"DR Schaart","year":"2016","unstructured":"Schaart DR, Charbon E, Frach T, Schulz V. Advances in digital SiPMs and their application in biomedical imaging. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect Accel Spectrometers Detect Assoc Equip. 2016;809:31\u201352.","journal-title":"Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect Accel Spectrometers Detect Assoc Equip"},{"key":"344_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"473","DOI":"10.1109\/TRPMS.2017.2756674","volume":"1","author":"P Lecoq","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lecoq P. Pushing the limits in time-of-flight PET imaging. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2017;1:473\u201385.","journal-title":"IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci"},{"key":"344_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1088\/1361-6560\/aafd52","volume":"64","author":"S Gundacker","year":"2019","unstructured":"Gundacker S, Turtos RM, Auffray E, Paganoni M, Lecoq P. High-frequency SiPM readout advances measured coincidence time resolution limits in TOF-PET. Phys Med Biol. 2019;64:055012.","journal-title":"Phys Med Biol"},{"key":"344_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gundacker S, Heering A. The silicon-photomultiplier: fundamentals and applications of a modern solid-state photon detector. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65.","DOI":"10.1088\/1361-6560\/ab7b2d"},{"key":"344_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1511","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.117.189514","volume":"58","author":"DFC Hsu","year":"2017","unstructured":"Hsu DFC, Ilan E, Peterson WT, Uribe J, Lubberink M, Levin CS. Studies of a next-generation silicon-photomultiplier\u2013based time-of-flight PET\/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1511\u20138.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR28","first-page":"471","volume":"48","author":"S Surti","year":"2007","unstructured":"Surti S, Kuhn A, Werner ME, Perkins AE, Kolthammer J, Karp JS. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET\/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:471\u201380.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3843","DOI":"10.1088\/0031-9155\/59\/14\/3843","volume":"59","author":"JA Kolthammer","year":"2014","unstructured":"Kolthammer JA, Su K-H, Grover A, Narayanan M, Jordan DW, Muzic RF. Performance evaluation of the ingenuity TF PET\/CT scanner with a focus on high count-rate conditions. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59:3843\u201359.","journal-title":"Phys Med Biol"},{"key":"344_CR30","volume-title":"NEMA NU 2-2018: performance measurements of positron emission tomographs","author":"NEMA","year":"2018","unstructured":"NEMA. NEMA NU 2-2018: performance measurements of positron emission tomographs; 2018."},{"key":"344_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1386","DOI":"10.1109\/TNS.2005.858176","volume":"52","author":"M Dahlbom","year":"2005","unstructured":"Dahlbom M, Schiepers C, Czernin J. Comparison of noise equivalent count rates and image noise. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2005;52:1386\u201390.","journal-title":"IEEE Trans Nucl Sci"},{"key":"344_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"845","DOI":"10.1097\/00004728-198609000-00027","volume":"10","author":"ME Casey","year":"1986","unstructured":"Casey ME, Hoffman EJ. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 7. A technique to reduce noise in accidental coincidence measurements and coincidence efficiency calibration. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986;10:845\u201350.","journal-title":"J Comput Assist Tomogr"},{"key":"344_CR33","first-page":"859","volume":"46","author":"D Brasse","year":"2005","unstructured":"Brasse D, Kinahan PE, Lartizien C, Comtat C, Casey M, Michel C. Correction methods for random coincidences in fully 3D whole-body PET: impact on data and image quality. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:859\u201367.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1335","DOI":"10.1109\/TNS.2016.2522766","volume":"63","author":"G-C Wang","year":"2016","unstructured":"Wang G-C, Li X, Niu X, et al. PET timing performance measurement method using NEMA NEC phantom. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2016;63:1335\u201342.","journal-title":"IEEE Trans Nucl Sci"},{"key":"344_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"237","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.109.068098","volume":"51","author":"C Lois","year":"2010","unstructured":"Lois C, Jakoby BW, Long MJ, et al. An assessment of the impact of incorporating time-of-flight information into clinical PET\/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:237\u201345.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"462","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.107.044834","volume":"49","author":"JS Karp","year":"2008","unstructured":"Karp JS, Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. Benefit of time-of-flight in PET: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:462\u201370.","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"344_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"181","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-009-1297-4","volume":"37","author":"R Boellaard","year":"2010","unstructured":"Boellaard R, O\u2019Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET\/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:181\u2013200.","journal-title":"Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"344_CR38","first-page":"1","volume-title":"Quantitative accuracy of time-of-flight PET at high count rates","author":"ME Daube-Witherspoon","year":"2016","unstructured":"Daube-Witherspoon ME, Scheuermann J, Viswanath V, Surti S, Matej S, Karp JS. Quantitative accuracy of time-of-flight PET at high count rates. Strasbourg: IEEE; 2016. p. 1\u20134."},{"key":"344_CR39","first-page":"3622","volume-title":"Comparison of image signal-to-noise ratio and noise equivalent counts in time-of-flight PET","author":"E Clementel","year":"2010","unstructured":"Clementel E, Vandenberghe S, Karp JS, Surti S. Comparison of image signal-to-noise ratio and noise equivalent counts in time-of-flight PET. Knoxville: IEEE; 2010. p. 3622\u20135."},{"key":"344_CR40","first-page":"1723","volume-title":"Influence of time-of-flight kernel accuracy in TOF-PET reconstruction","author":"ME Daube-Witherspoon","year":"2006","unstructured":"Daube-Witherspoon ME, Surti S, Matej S, Werner M, Jayanthi S, Karp JS. Influence of time-of-flight kernel accuracy in TOF-PET reconstruction. San Diego: IEEE; 2006. p. 1723\u20137."},{"key":"344_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"42","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-020-00309-8","volume":"7","author":"N Efthimiou","year":"2020","unstructured":"Efthimiou N, Thielemans K, Emond E, Cawthorne C, Archibald SJ, Tsoumpas C. Use of non-Gaussian time-of-flight kernels for image reconstruction of Monte Carlo simulated data of ultra-fast PET scanners. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:42.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"23","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-020-00288-w","volume":"7","author":"J Salvadori","year":"2020","unstructured":"Salvadori J, Labour J, Odille F, et al. Monte Carlo simulation of digital photon counting PET. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7:23.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR43","first-page":"3738","volume-title":"Performance investigation of a time-of-flight PET\/CT scanner","author":"BW Jakoby","year":"2008","unstructured":"Jakoby BW, Bercier Y, Conti M, et al. Performance investigation of a time-of-flight PET\/CT scanner. Dresden: IEEE; 2008. p. 3738\u201343."},{"key":"344_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"26","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-015-0132-1","volume":"2","author":"I Rausch","year":"2015","unstructured":"Rausch I, Cal-Gonz\u00e1lez J, Dapra D, et al. Performance evaluation of the biograph mCT flow PET\/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. EJNMMI Phys. 2015;2:26.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"},{"key":"344_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"270","DOI":"10.1097\/MNM.0000000000000962","volume":"40","author":"S Michopoulou","year":"2019","unstructured":"Michopoulou S, O\u2019Shaughnessy E, Thomson K, Guy MJ. Discovery molecular imaging digital ready PET\/CT performance evaluation according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. Nucl Med Commun. 2019;40:270\u20137.","journal-title":"Nucl Med Commun"},{"key":"344_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"22","DOI":"10.1186\/s40658-019-0264-9","volume":"6","author":"PRRV Carib\u00e9","year":"2019","unstructured":"Carib\u00e9 PRRV, Koole M, D\u2019Asseler Y, Van Den Broeck B, Vandenberghe S. Noise reduction using a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm on a time-of-flight PET-CT scanner. EJNMMI Phys. 2019;6:22.","journal-title":"EJNMMI Phys"}],"container-title":["EJNMMI Physics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]],"date-time":"2021-01-06T18:06:54Z","timestamp":1609956414000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/ejnmmiphys.springeropen.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]]},"references-count":46,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]}},"alternative-id":["344"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s40658-020-00344-5","relation":{},"ISSN":["2197-7364"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2197-7364","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,6]]},"assertion":[{"value":"3 February 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"30 November 2020","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"6 January 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and\/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Informed written consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"1"}}