ArticleThe British journal of radiology2015
Investigating the CT localizer radiograph: acquisition parameters, patient centring and their combined influence on radiation dose.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Automatic patient centering in computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of wearing a brassiere during low-dose chest CT for lung cancer screening.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Clinical relevance and governance of scout imaging data: a national survey of UK cross-sectional imaging radiographers.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Influence of Off-Centre Positioning, Scan Direction, and Localiser Projection Angle on Organ-Specific Radiation Doses in Low-Dose Chest CT: A Simulation Study Across Four Scanner Models.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Effects of Scout Direction, Off-Centering, and Scout Imaging Parameters on Radiation Dose Modulation in CT.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Automatic Exposure Control Attains Radiation Dose Modulation Matched with the Head Size in Pediatric Brain CT.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
- 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off-centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2022Article
- Feasibility Study of Dose Modulation for Reducing Radiation Dose with Arms-Down Patient Position in Abdominal Computed Tomography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- How patient off-centering impacts organ dose and image noise in pediatric head and thoracoabdominal CT.European radiology · 2019Article
- Establishing how patient size and degree of miscentring affect CTDIThe British journal of radiology · 2019Article
- The effect of vertical centering and scout direction on automatic tube voltage selection in chest CT: a preliminary phantom study on two different CT equipments.European journal of radiology open · 2019Article
- Dynamic fluence field modulation for miscentered patients in computed tomography.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2018Article
- Impact of the scout view orientation on the radiation exposure and image quality in thoracic and abdominal CT.European radiology · 2016Article
- Experiences of using a commercial dose management system (GE DoseWatch) for CT examinations.The British journal of radiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically investigate the effect of CT localizer radiograph acquisition on the tube current modulation and thus radiation dose of the subsequent diagnostic scan.
methodsLocalizer radiographs of an abdominal section CT phantom were taken, and the resulting volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) for the diagnostic scan was recorded. Variables included tube potential, the phantom's alignment within the CT scanner gantry in both the vertical and horizontal directions and the X-ray source angle at which the localizer was acquired.
resultsDiagnostic scan CTDIvol decreased with increasing tube potential. Vertical (table height) movement was found to affect radiation dose more than horizontal movement, with ±50 mm table movement resulting in a standard deviation in the diagnostic scan CTDIvol of 4.4 mGy, compared with 2.5 mGy with ±50 mm horizontal movement. Correspondingly, localizer angles of 90° or 270° (3 o'clock and 9 o'clock X-ray source positions) were less sensitive overall to alignment errors, with a standard deviation of 2.5 mGy, compared with a 0° or 180° angle, which had a standard deviation of 3.8 mGy.
conclusionTo achieve a consistently optimized radiation dose, the localizer protocol should be paired with the diagnostic acquisition protocol. A final acquisition angle of 90° should be used when possible to minimize dose variation resulting from alignment errors. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Localizer parameters that affect radiation output were identified for this scanner system. The importance of tube potential and acquisition angle was highlighted.
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.