ArticleMedicine2020
The effect of the reconstruction algorithm for the pulmonary nodule detection under the metal artifact caused by a pacemaker.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim was to compare the effects of metal artifacts from a pacemaker on pulmonary nodule detection among computed tomography (CT) images reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP), single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR), and forward-projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST).Nine simulated nodules were placed inside a chest phantom with a pacemaker. CT images reconstructed using FBP, SEMAR, and FIRST were acquired at low and standard dose, and were evaluated by 2 independent radiologists.FIRST demonstrated the most significantly improved metal artifact and nodule detection on low dose CT (P < .0032), except at 10 mA and 5-mm thickness. At standard-dose CT, SEMAR showed the most significant metal artifact reduction (P < .00001). In terms of nodule detection, no significant differences were observed between FIRST and SEMAR (P = .161).With a pacemaker present, FIRST showed the best nodule detection ability at low-dose CT and SEMAR is comparable to FIRST at standard dose CT.
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.