Observational studyPloS one2015
The Impact of Iterative Reconstruction on Computed Tomography Radiation Dosimetry: Evaluation in a Routine Clinical Setting.
Observational study in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of deep learning reconstruction on radiation dose reduction and cancer risk in CT examinations: a real-world clinical analysis.European radiology · 2025Article
- Patterns of computed tomography utilisation in injury management: latent classes approach using linked administrative data in Western Australia.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Observational
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effect of introduction of iterative reconstruction as a mandated software upgrade on radiation dosimetry in routine clinical practice over a range of computed tomography examinations.
methodsRandom samples of scanning data were extracted from a centralised Picture Archiving Communication System pertaining to 10 commonly performed computed tomography examination types undertaken at two hospitals in Western Australia, before and after the introduction of iterative reconstruction. Changes in the mean dose length product and effective dose were evaluated along with estimations of associated changes to annual cancer incidence.
resultsWe observed statistically significant reductions in the effective radiation dose for head computed tomography (22-27%) consistent with those reported in the literature. In contrast the reductions observed for non-contrast chest (37-47%); chest pulmonary embolism study (28%), chest/abdominal/pelvic study (16%) and thoracic spine (39%) computed tomography. Statistically significant reductions in radiation dose were not identified in angiographic computed tomography. Dose reductions translated to substantial lowering of the lifetime attributable risk, especially for younger females, and estimated numbers of incident cancers.
conclusionReduction of CT dose is a priority Iterative reconstruction algorithms have the potential to significantly assist with dose reduction across a range of protocols. However, this reduction in dose is achieved via reductions in image noise. Fully realising the potential dose reduction of iterative reconstruction requires the adjustment of image factors and forgoing the noise reduction potential of the iterative algorithm. Our study has demonstrated a reduction in radiation dose for some scanning protocols, but not to the extent experimental studies had previously shown or in all protocols expected, raising questions about the extent to which iterative reconstruction achieves dose reduction in real world clinical practice.
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.