ArticleThe British journal of radiology2015
Evaluation of a new system for chest tomosynthesis: aspects of image quality of different protocols determined using an anthropomorphic phantom.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Breathing motion compensation in chest tomosynthesis: evaluation of the effect on image quality and presence of artifacts.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Comparing synthetic mammograms based on wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis with digital mammograms.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Dependency of image quality on acquisition protocol and image processing in chest tomosynthesis-a visual grading study based on clinical data.The British journal of radiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the image quality obtained with the different protocols in a new chest digital tomosynthesis (DTS) system.
methodsA chest phantom was imaged with chest X-ray equipment with DTS. 10 protocols were used, and for each protocol, nine acquisitions were performed. Four observers visually rated the quality of the reconstructed section images according to pre-defined quality criteria in four different classes. The data were analysed with visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis, using the vendor-recommended protocol [12-s acquisition time, source-to-image distance (SID) 180 cm] as reference, and the area under the VGC curve (AUCVGC) was determined for each protocol and class of criteria.
resultsProtocols with a smaller swing angle resulted in a lower image quality for the classes of criteria "disturbance" and "homogeneity in nodule" but a higher image quality for the class "structure". The class "demarcation" showed little dependency on the swing angle. All protocols but one (6.3 s, SID 130 cm) obtained an AUCVGC significantly <0.5 (indicating lower quality than reference) for at least one class of criteria.
conclusionThe study indicates that the DTS protocol with 6.3 s yields image quality similar to that obtained with the vendor-recommended protocol (12 s) but with the clinically important advantage for patients with respiratory impairment of a shorter acquisition time. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The study demonstrates that the image quality may be strongly affected by the choice of protocol and that the vendor-recommended protocol may not be optimal.
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.