ArticleThe British journal of radiology2017
Impact of hybrid iterative reconstruction on unenhanced liver CT.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving image quality and lung nodule detection for low-dose chest CT by using generative adversarial network reconstruction.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo clarify the impact of hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) and filtered back projection (FBP) on unenhanced liver CT.
methods30 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) underwent unenhanced CT. The images were reconstructed with FBP and weak (Level 1), mild (Level 4) and strong (Level 7) levels of HIR (iDose
resultsAttenuation of the liver lesion with the strong level of HIR was significantly higher than that with FBP (p = 0.0005). Attenuations of hepatic parenchyma with all three HIR levels were significantly lower than that with FBP (p ≤ 0.0002 in all comparisons). Image noise with each of the three HIR levels was significantly smaller than that with FBP (p < 0.0001 in any comparison). There was no significant difference in lesion conspicuity and characterization between FBP and each HIR level (p ≥ 0.0819 in all comparisons).
conclusionAlthough attenuations of the liver lesion and hepatic parenchyma were significantly different between HIR and FBP, HIR had no significant effect on lesion conspicuity and characterization. Advances in knowledge: Attenuations of liver lesions and hepatic parenchyma differ significantly between HIR and FBP images.
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.