ArticleBMC medical imaging2020
Repeatability of small lung nodule measurement in low-dose lung screening: a phantom study.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the effect of scanning parameter on the size and density of pulmonary nodules: a phantom study.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Ultra-low-dose spectral-detector computed tomography for the accurate quantification of pulmonary nodules: an anthropomorphic chest phantom study.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2023Article
- Application effect of low-dose spiral CT on pulmonary nodules and its diagnostic value for benign and malignant nodules.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer screening revealed that people with small pulmonary nodules are mostly asymptomatic and that some of these people are at risk of developing lung cancer, so we intended to explore the repeatability of small lung nodule measurement in low-dose lung screening.
methodsWe scanned eight ground-glass nodules (GGNs) and solid nodules, with diameters of 3, 5, 8, and 10 mm. They were divided according to the different combination schemes of tube voltage (KV) and tube current (mA) as 70, 80, 100, and 120 KV, and currents of nine tubes were divided as 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 mAs.
resultsCompared with the conventional dose group (120 kVp, 100 mAs), the nodule diameter and solid nodule volume measured by all scanning combinations were more consistent (P > 0.05), the volumes of 10 mm GGNs combinations were consistent (P > 0.05), the volumes of 8 mm GGNs were consistent (P > 0.05), the volumes of 5 mm GGNs combinations were consistent (P > 0.05), and the volumes of 3 mm were consistent (P > 0.05).
conclusionIn lung cancer screening, CT parameters should be as follows: tube voltage is more than 80 kVp, and tube current is 80 mAs in order to meet the requirements for the accurate measurement of the diameter and volume of pulmonary nodules.
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.