ArticleMedical physics2017
Average glandular dose coefficients for pendant-geometry breast CT using realistic breast phantoms.
Article in Medical physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design and measurement of 3D-printed variable-morphology and variable-density breast phantoms for mammography and breast CT dose assessment.3D printing in medicine · 2026Article
- Hybrid simulation of breast CT for assessing microcalcification detectability.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Breast dosimetry in alternative X-ray-based imaging modalities used in current clinical practices.European journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Designing a breast support device for phase contrast tomographic imaging: getting ready for a clinical trial.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- High-resolutionJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021Article
- Effects of kV, filtration, dose, and object size on soft tissue and iodine contrast in dedicated breast CT.Medical physics · 2020Article
- High resolution microcalcification signal profiles for dedicated breast CT.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2020Article
- Shading artifact correction in breast CT using an interleaved deep learning segmentation and maximum-likelihood polynomial fitting approach.Medical physics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo design volume-specific breast phantoms from breast CT (bCT) data sets and estimate the associated normalized mean glandular dose coefficients for breast CT using Monte Carlo methods.
methodsA large cohort of bCT data sets (N = 215) was used to evaluate breast volume into quintiles (plus the top 5%). The average radius profile was then determined for each of the six volume-specific groups and used to both fabricate physical phantoms and generate mathematical phantoms (V1-V6; "V" denotes classification by volume). The MCNP6 Monte Carlo code was used to model a prototype bCT system fabricated at our institution; and this model was validated against physical measurements in the fabricated phantoms. The mathematical phantoms were used to simulate normalized mean glandular dose coefficients for both monoenergetic source photons "DgN
resultsSatisfactory agreement was observed for dose estimations using MCNP6 compared with both physical measurements in the V1, V3, and V5 phantoms (R
conclusionBreast phantoms were designed using a large cohort of bCT data sets across a range of six breast sizes. These phantoms were then fabricated and used for the estimation of glandular dose in breast CT. The mathematical phantoms and associated glandular dose coefficients for a range of breast sizes (V1-V6) and glandular fractions (5th to 95th percentiles) are available for interested users.
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.