ArticleMedical physics2020
Inter- and intra-software reproducibility of computed tomography lung density measurements.
Article in Medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Use of Computed Tomography Densitometry for the Assessment of Emphysema in Clinical Trials: A Position Paper from the Fleischner Society.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Lung Volume Change Assessment in Moderate and Severe COVID-19 Using CT Volumetry.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Pulmonary emphysema and coronary artery calcifications at baseline LDCT and long-term mortality in smokers and former smokers of the ITALUNG screening trial.European radiology · 2023Article
- [Pulmonary Emphysema: Visual Interpretation and Quantitative Analysis].Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe chi · 2021Review
- Automated CT Staging of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Severity for Predicting Disease Progression and Mortality with a Deep Learning Convolutional Neural Network.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2021Article
- Quantitative Evaluation of COVID-19 Pneumonia Lung Extension by Specific Software and Correlation with Patient Clinical Outcome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMultiple commercial, open-source, and academic software tools exist for objective quantification of lung density in computed tomography (CT) images. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the intersoftware reproducibility of CT lung density measurements.
methodsComputed tomography images from 50 participants from the COPDGene
resultsIntersoftware mean bias was within ±0.22 mL, ±0.46%, and ±0.97 HU for TLV, LAA
conclusionsComputed tomography total lung volume and lung density measurement bias and reproducibility was reported across eight different software tools. Bias was negligible across vendors, reproducibility was comparable for software tools generated by academic-based groups and commercial vendors, and segmentation QA had negligible impact on measurement variability between software tools. In summary, results from this study report the amount of additional measurement variability that should be accounted for when using different software tools to measure lung density longitudinally with well-standardized image acquisition protocols. However, intrasoftware reproducibility was deterministic for all cases so use of the same software tool to reduce variability for serial studies is highly recommended.
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.