ArticleClinical imaging2020
Retrospective analysis of 1118 outpatient chest CT scans to determine factors associated with excess scan length.
Article in Clinical imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- TOPOS: target organ prediction on scout views for automated CT scan planning.European radiology · 2026Article
- Mapping the Landscape of Over-Scanning in CT Imaging: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Review
- Individualized Radiation Dose Assessment in Low-Dose Chest CT: The Role of DLPss and Topogram Optimization.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Opportunistic Screening on Chest CT, From theAJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2026Review
- Low-Dose CT Quality Assurance at Scale: Automated Detection of Overscanning, Underscanning, and Image Noise.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- AI-driven assessment of over-scanning in chest CT: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of radiology open · 2025Review
- AI for image quality and patient safety in CT and MRI.European radiology experimental · 2025Review
- Redefining Radiation Metrics: Evaluating Actual Doses in Computed Tomography Scans.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Article
- Deep learning-based fully automated Z-axis coverage range definition from scout scans to eliminate overscanning in chest CT imaging.Insights into imaging · 2021Article
- Excessive z-axis scan coverage in body CT: frequency and causes.European radiology · 2021Article
- Automatic Scan Range Delimitation in Chest CT Using Deep Learning.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 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
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
RATIONALE
objectivesExcess z-axis scanning continues as an unnecessary source of radiation. This study seeks to determine patient, technologist and CT factors that affect excess scan length for chest CT. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective evaluation of 1118 consecutive noncontrast chest CT scans, over twelve consecutive months, was performed for evaluation of scan length above and below the lung parenchyma. Scan length >2 cm was considered excessive. Bivariate analysis for mean excess scan length and presence of excess scan length analyzed technologist's exam volume during the study period, patient age, patient gender, day of week, and time of day as categorical variables. Technologists performing >100 chest CT scans during the study period were considered high-volume while all others were considered low-volume.
resultsMean excess scan length was 5 mm, 29 mm, and 33 mm above the lungs, below the lungs, and total. 81% and 95% of studies had excess scanning above the lungs and below the lungs respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that high volume technologists, male patients, and patients younger than 65 had a greater amount of excess scan length and presence of excessive scanning above the lungs; high volume technologists and male patients had a greater amount of excess scan length below the lungs, and high volume technologists and patients older than 65 had greater presence of excessive scanning below the lungs, each p < 0.001.
conclusionsExcess scanning on chest CT is common, varies by patient age and gender and was significantly greater for high volume technologists.
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.