Erratum to: Performance of ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction in lung cancer screening: limiting radiation exposure to the equivalent of conventional chest X-ray imaging.

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.

1. Improving visibility of small anatomical details on low and ultra-low dose computed tomography with artificial intelligence-based image reconstructions.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026
   Article
2. The role of ultra-low-dose computed tomography in the detection of pulmonary pathologies: a prospective observational study.Polish journal of radiology · 2022
   Article
3. An Audit of Opportunistic Lung Cancer Screening in a Canadian Province.Journal of primary care & community health
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Performance of ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction in lung cancer screening: limiting radiation exposure to the equivalent of conventional chest X-ray imaging.2016

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.