In the original article [1], there was a mistake in Figure 3 as published. Due to a mistake in the publication process, Figure 2 and Figure 3 were the same. The corrected Figure 3 appears below. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. The original article has been updated.
Figure 3.
Average and peak recovery coefficients from the Micro Hollow Sphere phantom. For an acquisition time of two minutes per bed position, the apparent RCavg (a) of the 8 mm sphere measured with T/B ratio 10:1 exceeds that of the bigger spheres for low β, as the center of this sphere happened to coincide with the center of a voxel. Taking RCpeak as a measure for the recovery coefficient (b), the recovery coefficients are lower, but more robust.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Reference
- 1.Rijnsdorp S., Roef M.J., Arends A.J. Impact of the Noise Penalty Factor on Quantification in Bayesian Penalized Likelihood (Q.Clear) Reconstructions of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT Scans. Diagnostics. 2021;11:847. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11050847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]