ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2020
Comparative performance analysis for abdominal phantom ROI detectability according to CT reconstruction algorithm: ADMIRE.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coronary calcium score and emphysema extent on different CT radiation dose protocols in lung cancer screening.European radiology · 2025Article
- Comparison of ADMIRE, SAFIRE, and Filtered Back Projection in Standard and Low-Dose Non-Enhanced Head CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Optimizing Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Stroke CT Protocols: Proposed Diagnostic Reference Levels for Multiphase CT Angiography and Perfusion Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe compared and analyzed the detectability performance pertaining to an abdominal phantom including a region of interest (ROI) according to a computed tomography (CT) reconstruction algorithm.
methodsThree types of reconstruction algorithms (FBP, SAFIRE, and ADMIRE) were used to evaluate the detectability performance using the abdominal phantom (phantom size: 25 × 18 × 28 cm
resultsThe characteristic of the ADMIRE-3 reconstructed image was higher than those of the FBP and SAFIRE-3 reconstructed images. The CNR values of the SAFIRE and ADMIRE images were much higher than the corresponding values of the FBP images. The difference in COV values for the ADMIRE images was ~1.2 times lower than the corresponding values of the SAFIRE images.
conclusionThe comparative analysis of the abdominal phantom low-contrast resolution differences for each CT exposure parameters showed that ADMIRE demonstrated better results than SAFIRE and FBP in terms of contrast, CNR, COV difference, and 1D NPS. This indicates that ADMIRE can provide a clearer observation even with the same number of contrast objects as compared to SAFIRE and FBP owing to its better contrast resolution in the central part of the contrast hole at low kV.
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.