ArticlePediatric radiology2017
CT image quality in sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction phantom study - is there a point of diminishing returns?
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiation dose and signal-to-noise ratio in pediatric head CT: a phantom study comparing photon-counting and energy-integrating detectors.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of quantitative image quality of cardiac computed tomography between raw-data-based and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms with an emphasis on image sharpness.Pediatric radiology · 2020Article
- Application of Vendor-Neutral Iterative Reconstruction Technique to Pediatric Abdominal Computed Tomography.Korean journal of radiology · 2019Article
- User-Friendly Vendor-Specific Guideline for Pediatric Cardiothoracic Computed Tomography Provided by the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Congenital Heart Disease Study Group: Part 1. Imaging Techniques.Korean journal of radiology · 2019Review
- Quantitative Image Quality and Histogram-Based Evaluations of an Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm at Low-to-Ultralow Radiation Dose Levels: A Phantom Study in Chest CT.Korean journal of radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn our pediatric practice, we have observed qualitatively limited improvement in the image quality of images generated with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) compared to series generated with filtered back projection (FBP), particularly in cases near or below a CT dose index volume (CTDI
objectiveTo determine whether the image quality advantage of SAFIRE remains constant across clinically used CT dose levels in an American College of Radiology (ACR) CT accreditation phantom including the lower dose range used in pediatric imaging. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn exemption from institutional review board approval was obtained for this phantom-based study. An ACR quality phantom was scanned in incremental kV steps and effective tube current intervals. Acquisitions were reconstructed with FBP and SAFIRE strengths of 1, 3 and 5. Image quality measures were calculated including signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), low-contrast resolution and high-contrast resolution. Peak SNR was also calculated. Descriptive and nonparametric statistics were used to compare these image quality metrics while normalizing to CT dose index (CTDI).
resultsThe percent improvement in SNR and peak SNR of SAFIRE reconstructions compared to FBP decreased from about 70% for image sets acquired above a 1.42 mGy CTDI to 25% at a 0.25 mGy CTDI. CNR improvement with SAFIRE did not vary with dose. No significant difference was seen in the low-contrast resolution or high-contrast resolution of SAFIRE images compared to FBP.
conclusionSNR did not improve equally after applying SAFIRE across a spectrum clinically used CTDIs. Below a threshold CTDI, the incremental improvement of SAFIRE compared to FBP decreased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27891546What 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.