ORCID Profile
0000-0002-1204-5586
Current Organisations
CHRU de Brest
,
Université de Bretagne Occidentale
,
Deakin University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 13-04-2022
DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0266830
Abstract: Studies of training and competition load in sport are usually based on data that represents a s le of a league and or annual training program. These studies sometimes explore important factors that are affected by load, such as training adaptations and injury risk. The generalisability of the conclusions of these studies, can depend on how much load varies between seasons, training phases and teams. The interpretation of previous load studies and the design of future load studies should be influenced by an understanding of how load can vary across seasons, training phases and between teams. The current study compared training loads (session rating of perceived exertion x session duration) between all (8) teams in an elite Netball competition for multiple (2) season phases and (2) seasons. A total of 29,545 records of athlete session training loads were included in the analysis. Linear mixed models identified differences between seasons and training phases (p .05). There were also differences between teams and a complex set of interactions between these three factors (season, phase, and team) (p .05). While the absolute value of the training loads reported here are only relevant to elite netball, these results illustrate that when data is s led from a broader context, the range and variation in load may increase. This highlights the importance of cautiously interpreting and generalisation of findings from load studies that use limited data sets.
Publisher: Society of Nuclear Medicine
Date: 09-06-2016
DOI: 10.2967/JNUMED.115.171983
Abstract: Pre- and posttreatment PET comparative scans should ideally be obtained with identical acquisition and processing, but this is often impractical. The degree to which differing protocols affect PERCIST classification is unclear. This study evaluates the consistency of PERCIST classification across different reconstruction algorithms and whether a proprietary software tool can harmonize SUV estimation sufficiently to provide consistent response classification. Eighty-six patients with non-small cell lung cancer, colorectal liver metastases, or metastatic melanoma who were scanned for therapy monitoring purposes were prospectively recruited in this multicenter trial. Pre- and posttreatment PET scans were acquired in protocols compliant with the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging and the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) acquisition guidelines and were reconstructed with a point spread function (PSF) or PSF + time-of-flight (TOF) for optimal tumor detection and also with standardized ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) known to fulfill EANM harmonizing standards. After reconstruction, a proprietary software solution was applied to the PSF ± TOF data (PSF ± TOF.EQ) to harmonize SUVs with the OSEM values. The impact of differing reconstructions on PERCIST classification was evaluated. For the OSEM Reconstruction algorithm-dependent variability in PERCIST classification is a significant issue but can be overcome by harmonizing SULs using a proprietary software tool.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 27-05-2021
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 30-05-2017
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 30-07-2015
No related grants have been discovered for Tanisha Tate.