[Turku PET Centre] [PET data analysis] [Main page] [Previous page] [Next page]
After the model has been validated, the experimental design needs to be evaluated:
These affect the convenience of the study procedure, signal-to-noise ratio, the speed of data processing, and the reliability of the results.
The "garbage in-garbage out" paradigm.
Budinger TF, Huesman RH, Knittel B, Friedland RP, Derenzo SE. Physiological modeling of dynamic measurements of metabolism using positron emission tomography. In: Greitz T et al. The metabolism of the human brain studied with positron emission tomography. Raven Press, New York, 1985.
Carson RE. The development and application of mathematical models in nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med. 1991; 32:2206-2208.
Garfinkel D. Computer modeling, complex biological systems, and their simplifications. Am J Physiol 1980; 239: R1-R6.
Graham MM. Model simplification: complexity versus reduction. Circulation 1985; 72:IV63-IV68.
Huang SC, Barrio JR, Phelps ME. Neuroreceptor assay with positron emission tomography: equilibrium versus dynamic approaches. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1986; 6:515-521.
Landaw EM, DiStefano III JJ. Multiexponential, multicompartmental, and noncompartmental modeling. II. Data analysis and statistical consideration. Am J Physiol 1984; 246:R665-R677.
Laruelle M. Modelling: when and why? Eur J Nucl Med. 1999; 26:571-572.
Mintun MA, Raichle ME, Kilbourn MR, Wooten GF, Welch MJ. A quantitative model for the in vivo assessment of drug binding sites with positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol 1984; 15:217-227.
Motulsky HJ, Ransnas LA. Fitting curves to data using nonlinear regression: a practical and nonmathematical review. FASEB J 1987; 1:365-374.