ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2020
Patient organ and effective dose estimation in CT: comparison of four software applications.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inter-software variability in CT organ-dose calculation under identical scan conditions: implications for users and dose evaluation in the Japanese population.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- MIRD Pamphlet No. 34, Part 2: Benchmarking of MIRDct Software for CT Organ Dose Estimation.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- Estimation of the effective dose in torsoEJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Optimizing lens and organ dose evaluation in head CT examinations using monte carlo simulation: influence of gantry tilt and scan range.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Prediction of Breast Radiation Absorbed Dose Chest CT Examinations Using Machine Learning Techniques.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- A practical slice averaged image method for precise CT size specific dose estimates.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic CT organ dose estimation in whole-body PET/CT examinations-comparison of a patient-specific monte carlo approach and a computational phantom-based CT dosimetry tool.EJNMMI physics · 2025Article
- Fetal dose in pregnant CT patients: a comparison of four software packages.European radiology · 2025Article
- Effective Dose Estimation in Computed Tomography by Machine Learning.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Automated Measurement of Effective Radiation Dose byTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Article
- Incidence and Mortality Life-Attributable Risks for Patients Subjected to Recurrent CT Examinations and Cumulative Effective Dose Exceeding 100 mSv.Clinics and practice · 2024Article
- Characterizing imaging radiation risk in a population of 8918 patients with recurrent imaging for a better effective dose.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of organ and effective dose estimations from different Monte Carlo simulation-based software methods in infant CT and comparison with direct phantom measurements.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Statement of the Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM) task group on radiation dose monitoring systems.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- OPTIMIZATION OF LUNG CT PROTOCOL FOR THE DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION OF COVID-19 LUNG DISEASE.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2021Article
- Split-bolus computed tomography urography (CTU) achieves more than half of radiation dose reduction in females and overweight patients than conventional single-bolus computed tomography urography.Translational oncology · 2021Article
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
backgroundRadiation dose in computed tomography (CT) has become a topic of high interest due to the increasing numbers of CT examinations performed worldwide. Hence, dose tracking and organ dose calculation software are increasingly used. We evaluated the organ dose variability associated with the use of different software applications or calculation methods.
methodsWe tested four commercial software applications on CT protocols actually in use in our hospital: CT-Expo, NCICT, NCICTX, and Virtual Dose. We compared dose coefficients, estimated organ doses and effective doses obtained by the four software applications by varying exposure parameters. Our results were also compared with estimates reported by the software authors.
resultsAll four software applications showed dependence on tube voltage and volume CT dose index, while only CT-Expo was also dependent on other exposure parameters, in particular scanner model and pitch caused a variability till 50%. We found a disagreement between our results and those reported by the software authors (up to 600%), mainly due to a different extent of examined body regions. The relative range of the comparison of the four software applications was within 35% for most organs inside the scan region, but increased over the 100% for organs partially irradiated and outside the scan region. For effective doses, this variability was less evident (ranging from 9 to 36%).
conclusionsThe two main sources of organ dose variability were the software application used and the scan region set. Dose estimate must be related to the process used for its calculation.
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.