The enormous Burden of digestive diseases on our healthcare system

ArticleinCurrent Gastroenterology Reports 5(2):93-4 · May 2003with6 Reads
DOI: 10.1007/s11894-003-0074-y · Source: PubMed
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The performance of the Integral Convolution and the Dual Energy Window scatter correction methods in 3D PET has been evaluated over a wide range of statistical content of acquired data (1 M to 400 M events). The order in which scatter correction and detector normalization should be applied has also been investigated. Phantom and human neuroreceptor studies were used with the following figures of merit: axial and radial uniformity, sinogram and image noise, contrast accuracy and contrast accuracy uniformity. Both scatter correction methods perform reliably in the range of number of events examined. Normalization applied after scatter correction yields better radial uniformity and fewer image artefacts
    Conference Paper · Dec 1996
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Gastrointestinal cancer is a major medical and economic burden worldwide. Oesophageal and gastric cancers are most common in the non-industrialized countries, while colorectal cancer is the predominant gastrointestinal malignancy in westernized countries. Their aetiology is mainly related to correctable and preventable lifestyle habits; namely diet (including obesity), physical activity, alcohol and tobacco intake, and sanitation. Prevention and/or treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection would significantly reduce the prevalence of gastric cancer. Screening for cancer, its early detection and treatment requires medical facilities, endoscopic expertise and a major investment of national financial resources. This is only feasible in affluent industrialized countries such as Japan for gastric cancer, some western countries for oesophageal and colorectal cancer. Only population screening for colorectal cancer has been proven feasible and cost-beneficial.
    Article · Mar 2004
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Administrative databases, registries, and clinical databases are designed for different purposes and therefore have different advantages and disadvantages in providing data for enhancing quality. Administrative databases provide the advantages of size, availability, and generalizability, but are subject to constraints inherent in the coding systems used and from data collection methods optimized for billing. Registries are designed for research and quality reporting but require significant investment from participants for secondary data collection and quality control. Electronic health records contain all of the data needed for quality research and measurement, but that data is too often locked in narrative text and unavailable for analysis. National mandates for electronic health record implementation and functionality will likely change this landscape in the near future.
    Article · Oct 2010
Show more

    Recommended publications

    Discover more