ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2020
Evaluation of image quality and task performance for a mobile C-arm with a complementary metal-oxide semiconductor detector.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Subjective Image Quality of Mobile C-Arms Equipped with a-Si, CMOS or IGZO Flat-Panel Detectors for Intraoperative Fluoroscopy.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Determinants of radiation exposure during mobile cone-beam CT-guided robotic-assisted bronchoscopy.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2024Article
- Photon counting-energy integrating hybrid flat panel detector systems for image-guided interventions: an experimental proof-of-concept.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Article
- A C-arm photon counting CT prototype with volumetric coverage using multi-sweep step-and-shoot acquisitions.Physics in medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Technical assessment of 2D and 3D imaging performance of an IGZO-based flat-panel X-ray detector.Medical physics · 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
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We assessed interventional radiologists' task-based image quality preferences for two- and three-dimensional images obtained with a complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) flat-panel detector versus a hydrogenated amorphous silicon (a-Si:H) flat-panel detector. CMOS and a-Si:H detectors were implemented on identical mobile C-arms to acquire radiographic, fluoroscopic, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of cadavers undergoing simulated interventional procedures using low- and high-dose settings. Images from both systems were displayed side by side on calibrated, diagnostic-quality displays, and three interventional radiologists evaluated task performance relevant to each image and ranked their preferences based on visibility of pertinent anatomy and interventional devices. Overall, CMOS images were preferred in fluoroscopy (
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.