ArticleJournal of digital imaging2010
Development and validation of automated 2D-3D bronchial airway matching to track changes in regional bronchial morphology using serial low-dose chest CT scans in children with chronic lung disease.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-throughput phenotyping and genetic linkage of cortical bone microstructure in the mouse.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Novel end points for clinical trials in young children with cystic fibrosis.Expert review of respiratory medicine · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To address potential concern for cumulative radiation exposure with serial spiral chest computed tomography (CT) scans in children with chronic lung disease, we developed an approach to match bronchial airways on low-dose spiral and low-dose high-resolution CT (HRCT) chest images to allow serial comparisons. An automated algorithm matches the position and orientation of bronchial airways obtained from HRCT slices with those in the spiral CT scan. To validate this algorithm, we compared manual matching vs automatic matching of bronchial airways in three pediatric patients. The mean absolute percentage difference between the manually matched spiral CT airway and the index HRCT airways were 9.4 ± 8.5% for the internal diameter measurements, 6.0 ± 4.1% for the outer diameter measurements, and 10.1 ± 9.3% for the wall thickness measurements. The mean absolute percentage difference between the automatically matched spiral CT airway measurements and index HRCT airway measurements were 9.2 ± 8.6% for the inner diameter, 5.8 ± 4.5% for the outer diameter, and 9.9 ± 9.5% for the wall thickness. The overall difference between manual and automated methods was 2.1 ± 1.2%, which was significantly less than the interuser variability of 5.1 ± 4.6% (p<0.05). Tests of equivalence had p<0.05, demonstrating no significant difference between the two methods. The time required for matching was significantly reduced in the automated method (p<0.01) and was as accurate as manual matching, allowing efficient comparison of airways obtained on low-dose spiral CT imaging with low-dose HRCT scans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.