ArticleBJR open2020
The difference in dose and image quality between magnification methods used after the introduction of larger 60-inch operator screens.
Article in BJR open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Radiation Dose Between Dedicated Cardiac and General-Purpose Angiography Systems in Coronary Intervention.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- The use of digital magnification to reduce radiation dose in the cardiac catheter laboratory.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether the use of display matrix magnification on larger operator screens without the use of conventional magnification can reduce radiation dose to the patient, and what effect it would have on image quality.
methodsThe kerma-area product (KAP) resulting from standard projections in cardiac angiography were measured when an anthropomorphic phantom was imaged using conventional magnification method and display matrix magnification. The image quality was also evaluated by three observers using a TOR 18FG test tool for both magnification method.
resultsThe mean radiation KAP for the seven views with conventional magnification was 36.65 µGy m
conclusionUsing display matrix magnification instead of conventional equipment magnification significantly reduces radiation does in all standard cardiac views without reducing image quality for the operator. This reduction in radiation dose is significant ( ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is a new method of reducing significant dose to the patient during cardiology examinations and may encourage further studies in other fluoroscopy lead examination to see if it could work for them.
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.