ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Effect of Filtered Back-Projection Filters to Low-Contrast Object Imaging in Ultra-High-Resolution (UHR) Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation and implementation of an independent Kilovoltage X-ray-based imaging platform for carbon ion radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Resolution-noise characteristics of common FDK filter kernels: A practical reference for preclinical cone-beam micro-CT.PloS one · 2026Article
- On the Response of a Micro Non-Destructive Testing X-ray Detector.Materials (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
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, the effect of filter schemes on several low-contrast materials was compared using standard and ultra-high-resolution (UHR) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging. The performance of the UHR-CBCT was quantified by measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF) and the noise power spectrum (NPS). The MTF was measured at the radial location around the cylindrical phantom, whereas the NPS was measured in the eight different homogeneous regions of interest. Six different filter schemes were designed and implemented in the CT sinogram from each imaging configuration. The experimental results indicated that the filter with smaller smoothing window preserved the MTF up to the highest spatial frequency, but larger NPS. In addition, the UHR imaging protocol provided 1.77 times better spatial resolution than the standard acquisition by comparing the specific spatial frequency (
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.