ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021
Novel method to determine recursive filtration and noise reduction in fluoroscopic imaging - a comparison of four different vendors.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2021. 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.
- Comparison of Subjective Image Quality of Mobile C-Arms Equipped with a-Si, CMOS or IGZO Flat-Panel Detectors for Intraoperative Fluoroscopy.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Development of a Dedicated X-Ray Fluoroscopic Apparatus for Therapeutic Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Performance evaluation of two interventional fluoroscope suites for cardiovascular imaging.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study attempted to develop a method to measure the applied recursive filtration and to determine the noise reduction of four different fluoroscopic systems. The study also attempted to elucidate the importance of considering the recursive filter for quality control tests concerning signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) or image quality. The vendor's settings for recursive filtration factor (β) are, unfortunately, often not available. Hence, a method to determine the recursive filtration and associated noise reduction would be useful.
methodThe recursive filter was determined by using a single fluoroscopic series and the method presented in this study. The theoretical noise reduction based on the choice of β was presented. In addition, the corresponding noise reduction, evaluated as the ratio of the standard deviation of the pixel value between a series with β equal to zero (recursive filtration off) and β > 0, was determined for different pulse rates given by pulses per second (pps), doses (mAs) and recursive filter. The images were acquired using clinically relevant radiation quality and quantity.
resultsThe presented method to measure the recursive filter exhibited high accuracy (1.08%) and precision (1.48%). The recursive filtration and noise reduction were measured for several settings for each vendor. The recursive filtration settings and associated recursive filtration factors for four different vendors were presented.
conclusionsThis study presented an accurate method to determine applied recursive filtration, which was easy to determine. Hence, for all quality control purposes, including noise evaluation, it was possible to consider the essential noise reduction given by the settings for recursive filtration. It was also possible to compare the recursive filtration settings and associated recursive filtration within and between vendors.
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.