[REVIEW]: SlicerSPECTRecon: A 3D Slicer Extension for SPECT Image Reconstruction

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @ObedDzik (Obed Dzikunu)
Repository: https://github.com/PyTomography/slicer_spect_recon.git
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): j_paper
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @mstimberg
Reviewers: @zapaishchykova, @cnmy-ro
Archive: Pending

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1140f85a0a6206a6739284f9b22a2150"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1140f85a0a6206a6739284f9b22a2150/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1140f85a0a6206a6739284f9b22a2150/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1140f85a0a6206a6739284f9b22a2150)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@zapaishchykova & @cnmy-ro, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @mstimberg know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @zapaishchykova

[editorialbot]

Hello humans, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1109/42.363108 is OK
- 10.1109/42.52985 is OK
- 10.1016/0169-2607(89)90111-9 is OK
- 10.1109/TNS.2002.998681 is OK
- 10.1109/NSSMIC.2006.354345 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6560/aa6911 is OK
- 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001675 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6560/aadac1 is OK
- 10.1109/TMI.2003.812251 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4614-7657-3_19 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2309.01977 is OK
- 10.1109/NSS/MIC42677.2020.9507966 is OK
- 10.21037/atm-20-5988 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- None

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.03 s (1041.3 files/s, 142358.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qt                               1              0              0           1753
Python                          15            105            150           1607
Markdown                         4             94              0            190
TeX                              1             14              0            146
JSON                             3              0              0             64
CMake                            5             12             17             51
YAML                             1              1              4             25
Bourne Shell                     1              0              0              5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            31            226            171           3841
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    84	Obed Dzikunu
    13	Luke Polson
     2	Carlos F. Uribe
     1	pearsomark

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1070

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[mstimberg]

👋🏼 @ObedDzik, @zapaishchykova, @cnmy-ro this is the review thread for the paper. All of our communications will happen here from now on.

As a reviewer, the first step is to create a checklist for your review by entering

@editorialbot generate my checklist

as the top of a new comment in this thread.

There are additional guidelines in the message at the start of this issue.

Please feel free to ping me (@mstimberg) if you have any questions/concerns.

[lukepolson]

@mstimberg we'll be merging the development branch with main soon, I hope this doesn't cause any issues during the review process. If possible, it may be better to check out the development branch when testing the software. Let us know however if there are any issues with this.

[mstimberg]

There is no general issue with this, but please make it clear for the reviewers how to best test/install the software.

[zapaishchykova]

Review checklist for @zapaishchykova

Conflict of interest

• I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

• I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

• Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/PyTomography/slicer_spect_recon.git?
• License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE or COPYING file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
• Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@ObedDzik) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
• Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
• Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
• Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
• Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

• Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
• Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
• Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

• A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
• Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
• Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
• Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
• Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
• Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1. Contribute to the software 2. Report issues or problems with the software 3. Seek support

Software paper

• Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
• A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
• State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
• Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
• References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

[zapaishchykova]

Hello!
I downloaded the example (- url to sample SPECT file
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bCz_hLgASAiQ38QrRlgrJ3lH_lOlqQb1/view?usp=sharing) and trying to reconstruct, see below the error log that I'm seeing:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/anna/Downloads/slicer_spect_recon-development/SlicerSPECTRecon/SlicerSPECTRecon.py", line 474, in onReconstructButton
    print(recon_volume_node.GetID())
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'GetID'
[Python] Please select a photopeak energy window


Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/anna/Downloads/slicer_spect_recon-development/SlicerSPECTRecon/SlicerSPECTRecon.py", line 453, in onReconstructButton
    recon_volume_node = self.logic.reconstruct( 
  File "/Users/anna/Downloads/slicer_spect_recon-development/SlicerSPECTRecon/Logic/SlicerSPECTReconLogic.py", line 128, in reconstruct
    volume_node = self.create_volume_node_from_recon(reconstructed_image_multibed, files_NM)
  File "/Users/anna/Downloads/slicer_spect_recon-development/SlicerSPECTRecon/Logic/SlicerSPECTReconLogic.py", line 170, in create_volume_node_from_recon
    saveFilesInBrowser(temp_file_path)
  File "/Users/anna/Downloads/slicer_spect_recon-development/SlicerSPECTRecon/Logic/VolumeUtils.py", line 11, in saveFilesInBrowser
    dicomBrowser = slicer.modules.DICOMWidget.browserWidget.dicomBrowser
AttributeError: module 'modules' has no attribute 'DICOMWidget'

FYI using the dev brunch

Minor suggestion is to make errors not "silent" in the python log only, but also guide users that it won't work without photopeak selected

[lukepolson]

Thanks for the good suggestion @zapaishchykova : ) . What are your thoughts on us providing some sort of youtube tutorial demonstrating how to use the software, and being explicit about the instructions/required fields to fill in?

[zapaishchykova]

@lukepolson - this is a great suggestion, it could be also as simple as instructions in the Readme

[lukepolson]

Sounds good, we also have a user manual file as well, but maybe it is difficult to find, so we can make it more explicit in the README.