Jump to content

Talk:PET-CT

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments

[edit]

This page fails to mention the second most useful attribute of PET/CT

An attenuation map can be derived from the CT otherwise the SUVs will appear abnormally low towards the centre of the body.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Retsil (talkcontribs) 08:38, 10 March 2008‎ (UTC)[reply]

Duplication

[edit]

This article duplicates and overlaps with the positron emission tomography article, with which it should be combined. Fbarw (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wrong duplication identified

[edit]

Needs to merge with SPECT, not PET.

I just proposed a merge. Rob Hurt (talk) 02:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SPECT/PET-CT, etc. is a distinctly different modality than PET alone.

PET-CT or PET/CT

[edit]

Google says PET/CT is the way to do this, not PET-CT. This is of course an abbreviation and there is no absolute standard but it seems that PET/CT is the most common method to abbreviate this. Therefore I think that the article and its contents should probably be changed to reflect the more common usage. 203.4.164.1 (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 21:28, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


{{requested move/dated}}


MOS:SLASH and WP:SUBPAGE ; these articles should not reside in subpage locations, and should avoid using slashes -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose moves for PET/CT and PET/MRI to PET-CT and PET-MRI. Agree that use of slashes is to be avoided in articles but these are headings; they are also the used names referenced in literature - see last ref and others in PET/MRI page. Would point to the heading of this Wikipedia page: Requested moves/Technical requests Iztwoz (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Harvard calls it "Pet-CT" [1]; and we have a guideline to avoid slashes, and these are found in the real world with slashes and with dashes, therefore the dashed form is preferred on Wikipedia. This is a Technical Move since it applies MOS:SLASH; a recommendation for Wikipedia article titles -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 01:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • And here's a paper in Nature that does it for PET-MRI [2] -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 01:31, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • And even PET-CAT doi:10.1093/annonc/mdm461 -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 01:31, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article at PET/CT was moved there a few hours ago due to a technical request. Sounds like it's time for someone (User:Iztwoz?) to open a formal move discussion at Talk:PET/CT to decide on the permanent name. EdJohnston (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As long as all pages are consistent - Somebody said Harvard uses Pet-CT…..the IAEA in its nuclear medicine section uses PET/CT predominantly…..and Google listings in the main do list PET/CT. Iztwoz (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: In case anyone is worried about PET/CT being a subpage of PET, it is not. However talk space allows subpages, so Talk:PET/CT (where we are now) is a subpage of Talk:PET. You can verify this by checking the upper left corner of this page. EdJohnston (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree What does Pubmed say? PET-CT: 10,238, PET/CT: 8009, PET-MR: 220, PET/MR: 175. Personally, I would have chosen a slash, but given that a dash seems more common, and a slash causes some technical confusion, I think we should move both articles to use a dash. GyroMagician (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Suggested redirects

[edit]

-- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 12:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]