Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26994093›Full record

ArticleRadiation protection dosimetry2016

EFFECT OF RADIATION DOSE LEVEL ON ACCURACY AND PRECISION OF MANUAL SIZE MEASUREMENTS IN CHEST TOMOSYNTHESIS EVALUATED USING SIMULATED PULMONARY NODULES.

Christina Söderman, Åse Allansdotter Johnsson, Jenny Vikgren, Rauni Rossi Norrlund, David Molnar, Angelica Svalkvist, Lars Gunnar Månsson, Magnus Båth

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Christina SödermanDepartment of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden christina.e.soderman@vgregion.se.
Åse Allansdotter JohnssonDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jenny VikgrenDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Rauni Rossi NorrlundDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
David MolnarDepartment of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Angelica SvalkvistDepartment of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Lars Gunnar MånssonDepartment of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Magnus BåthDepartment of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the dependency of the accuracy and precision of nodule diameter measurements on the radiation dose level in chest tomosynthesis. Artificial ellipsoid-shaped nodules with known dimensions were inserted in clinical chest tomosynthesis images. Noise was added to the images in order to simulate radiation dose levels corresponding to effective doses for a standard-sized patient of 0.06 and 0.04 mSv. These levels were compared with the original dose level, corresponding to an effective dose of 0.12 mSv for a standard-sized patient. Four thoracic radiologists measured the longest diameter of the nodules. The study was restricted to nodules located in high-dose areas of the tomosynthesis projection radiographs. A significant decrease of the measurement accuracy and intraobserver variability was seen for the lowest dose level for a subset of the observers. No significant effect of dose level on the interobserver variability was found. The number of non-measurable small nodules (≤5 mm) was higher for the two lowest dose levels compared with the original dose level. In conclusion, for pulmonary nodules at positions in the lung corresponding to locations in high-dose areas of the projection radiographs, using a radiation dose level resulting in an effective dose of 0.06 mSv to a standard-sized patient may be possible in chest tomosynthesis without affecting the accuracy and precision of nodule diameter measurements to any large extent. However, an increasing number of non-measurable small nodules (≤5 mm) with decreasing radiation dose may raise some concerns regarding an applied general dose reduction for chest tomosynthesis examinations in the clinical praxis.

Indexed as

Radiation DosageComputer SimulationHumansLungObserver VariationRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiography, ThoracicRadiologyReproducibility of ResultsSolitary Pulmonary NoduleThoraxTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID26994093
PMCPMC4911967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.