1978
DOI: 10.1016/s0001-2998(78)80035-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computers and quality control in nuclear medicine

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is well known that there is a compromise between sensitivity and resolution in collimated nuclear medicine systems [3,4]. The detectability of the radiopharmaceutical concentration in abnormalities depends on the interplay between various parameters, such as the positron emission tomography (PET) scanner's sensitivity, the amount of activity, the ratio of the target-to-background activity, the size of the target, and the irradiation time, among others [5][6][7][8][9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is well known that there is a compromise between sensitivity and resolution in collimated nuclear medicine systems [3,4]. The detectability of the radiopharmaceutical concentration in abnormalities depends on the interplay between various parameters, such as the positron emission tomography (PET) scanner's sensitivity, the amount of activity, the ratio of the target-to-background activity, the size of the target, and the irradiation time, among others [5][6][7][8][9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the nineteen-twenties, Walter A. Shewart, with a group of experts, established the scientific ground for quality control at Bell Telephone Laboratories Shewhart (1931). It is only in the nineteen fifties that quality control procedures were employed to ensure the precision of hospital laboratory machines used in biology, nuclear medicine, drug industry and other medical domains Anderson (1982); Batson et al (1951); Brookeman (1978); Hollinger & Lansing (1956); Loynd (1962); Pribr & Shuster (1967); Waid & Hoffmann (1955). Later, in the nineteen seventies, the use of these methods shifted to the monitoring of the effect of treatments on patients Kinsey et al (1989); Morgan et al (1987); Robinson & Williamson (1974); Walters & Griffin (1986); Wohl (1977), and then to other more complex levels such as the performance of departements Chamberlin et al (1993); The Inquiry into the management of care of children receiving complex heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary (2001), hospitals Sellick (1993), regions Tillett & Spencer (1982) or nation-wide processes Hand et al (1994).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%