ArticleAustralasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine2014
Radiation dose reduction with dictionary learning based processing for head CT.
Article in Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine, 2014. 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.
- Patch-based models and algorithms for image processing: a review of the basic principles and methods, and their application in computed tomography.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2016Review
- Improving Low-dose Cardiac CT Images based on 3D Sparse Representation.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In CT, ionizing radiation exposure from the scan has attracted much concern from patients and doctors. This work is aimed at improving head CT images from low-dose scans by using a fast Dictionary learning (DL) based post-processing. Both Low-dose CT (LDCT) and Standard-dose CT (SDCT) nonenhanced head images were acquired in head examination from a multi-detector row Siemens Somatom Sensation 16 CT scanner. One hundred patients were involved in the experiments. Two groups of LDCT images were acquired with 50 % (LDCT50 %) and 25 % (LDCT25 %) tube current setting in SDCT. To give quantitative evaluation, Signal to noise ratio (SNR) and Contrast to noise ratio (CNR) were computed from the Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements of GM, WM and CSF tissues. A blinded qualitative analysis was also performed to assess the processed LDCT datasets. Fifty and seventy five percent dose reductions are obtained for the two LDCT groups (LDCT50 %, 1.15 ± 0.1 mSv; LDCT25 %, 0.58 ± 0.1 mSv; SDCT, 2.32 ± 0.1 mSv; P < 0.001). Significant SNR increase over the original LDCT images is observed in the processed LDCT images for all the GM, WM and CSF tissues. Significant GM-WM CNR enhancement is noted in the DL processed LDCT images. Higher SNR and CNR than the reference SDCT images can even be achieved in the processed LDCT50 % and LDCT25 % images. Blinded qualitative review validates the perceptual improvements brought by the proposed approach. Compared to the original LDCT images, the application of DL processing in head CT is associated with a significant improvement of image quality.
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.