ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2019
Effects of acquisition method and reconstruction algorithm for CT number measurement on standard-dose CT and reduced-dose CT: a QIBA phantom study.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Chest CT in the evaluation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: recommendations of Asian Society of Thoracic Radiology.The British journal of radiology · 2026Guideline
- Deep Learning Reconstruction to Improve the Quality of MR Imaging: Evaluating the Best Sequence for T-category Assessment in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of deep learning reconstruction on standard to ultra-low-dose high-definition chest CT images.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Quantitative Analysis for Lung Disease on Thin-Section CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Area-Detector Computed Tomography for Pulmonary Functional Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Novel Intraoperative Navigation Using Ultra-High-Resolution CT in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy.Cancers · 2022Article
- Variability and Standardization of Quantitative Imaging: Monoparametric to Multiparametric Quantification, Radiomics, and Artificial Intelligence.Investigative radiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effect of different acquisition and reconstruction methods on the radiation dose and accuracy of CT number measurements, using a 320-detector row CT and a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance (QIBA) recommended phantom. MATERIALS AND
methodsAcquisitions were performed on a 320-detector row CT, as 64- and 80-detector row helical and wide detector step-and-shoot (i.e., wide volume) acquisitions with tube currents of 400 mA, 100 mA, 50 mA, 20 mA, and 10 mA. Image was reconstructed with the filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive iterative dose reduction using 3D processing (AIDR 3D), and forward projected model-based iterative reconstruction (FIRST) methods. The difference between measured CT numbers and the actual -856HU value of the phantom insert was determined by each CT acquisition protocol. Differences in actual and measured CT numbers were compared among acquisitions and among reconstruction methods by means of Tukey's HSD test.
resultsThe CT number obtained with 64-detector row helical acquisition was significantly larger than that obtained with others (p < 0.0001). At each tube current, the CT number reconstructed with FIRST was significantly smaller than that with others (p < 0.0001).
conclusionAcquisition and reconstruction methods are significantly affecting radiation dose reduction and accuracy of CT number measurements on a phantom study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30805851What 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.