Trial reportThe British journal of radiology2019
Improving image quality with model-based iterative reconstruction at quarter of nominal dose in upper abdominal CT.
Trial report in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of SR-DLR in low-dose abdominal CT: superior image quality and noise reduction.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Apparent Noise on CT Images Using Moving Average Filters.Journal of digital imaging · 2022Article
- Low-dose MDCT: evaluation of the impact of systematic tube current reduction and sparse sampling on quantitative paraspinal muscle assessment.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021Article
- Advanced imaging techniques for chronic pancreatitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the ability of a model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) for improving image quality in upper abdominal CT with quarter of the normal dose, in comparison with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR) at normal dose.
methods40 upper abdominal patients were randomly divided into two groups: normal-dose group (
resultsDose reduction of 75 % was achieved for the low-dose scan. The subjective scores (95 % confidence intervals) of the three groups (NI 10-40 % ASiR, NI 20-40% ASiR and NI 20-MBIR) were 4.00 ± 0.79 (3.62-4.37), 3.35 ± 0.58 (3.07-3.62) and 3.90 ± 0.64 (3.60-4.19), respectively with no difference between the NI 10-40% ASiR and NI20-MBIR groups and good consistency between reviewers (κ = 0.726). MBIR had statistically lower SD values and higher contrast-to-noise ratio values in the liver, spleen, pancreas, kidney and erector spine than NI 10-40% ASiR and NI 20-40% ASiR (all
conclusionAt 75 % dose reduction, MBIR provides similar image quality compared to 40% ASiR at normal-dose. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: MBIR provides good image quality at 25 % of the normal dose.
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.