Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27495078›Full record

ArticleMedicine2016

Comparison of image quality from filtered back projection, statistical iterative reconstruction, and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms in abdominal computed tomography.

Yu Kuo, Yi-Yang Lin, Rheun-Chuan Lee, Chung-Jung Lin, Yi-You Chiou, Wan-Yuo Guo

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Estimating detectability indexJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yu KuoDepartment of radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Yi-Yang Lin
Rheun-Chuan Lee
Chung-Jung Lin
Yi-You Chiou
Wan-Yuo Guo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the image noise-reducing abilities of iterative model reconstruction (IMR) with those of traditional filtered back projection (FBP) and statistical iterative reconstruction (IR) in abdominal computed tomography (CT) imagesThis institutional review board-approved retrospective study enrolled 103 patients; informed consent was waived. Urinary bladder (n = 83) and renal cysts (n = 44) were used as targets for evaluating imaging quality. Raw data were retrospectively reconstructed using FBP, statistical IR, and IMR. Objective image noise and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were calculated and analyzed using one-way analysis of variance. Subjective image quality was evaluated and analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction.Objective analysis revealed a reduction in image noise for statistical IR compared with that for FBP, with no significant differences in SNR. In the urinary bladder group, IMR achieved up to 53.7% noise reduction, demonstrating a superior performance to that of statistical IR. IMR also yielded a significantly superior SNR to that of statistical IR. Similar results were obtained in the cyst group. Subjective analysis revealed reduced image noise for IMR, without inferior margin delineation or diagnostic confidence.IMR reduced noise and increased SNR to greater degrees than did FBP and statistical IR. Applying the IMR technique to abdominal CT imaging has potential for reducing the radiation dose without sacrificing imaging quality.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAgedFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedKidney Diseases, CysticMaleMiddle AgedMultidetector Computed TomographyRadiation DosageRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesUrinary Bladder

Identifiers

PMID27495078
PMCPMC4979832

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.