ArticleRadiology research and practice2021
Dosimetry and Comparison between Different CT Protocols (Low Dose, Ultralow Dose, and Conventional CT) for Lung Nodules' Detection in a Phantom.
Article in Radiology research and practice, 2021. 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.
- Towards a more realistic anthropomorphic chest phantom using 3D-printed and cork-integrated components.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Chest CT scan for the screening of air anomalies at risk of pulmonary barotrauma for the initial medical assessment of fitness to dive in a military population.Frontiers in physiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effects of dose reduction in lung nodule detection need better understanding. PURPOSE: To compare the detection rate of simulated lung nodules in a chest phantom using different computed tomography protocols, low dose (LD), ultralow dose (ULD), and conventional (CCT), and to quantify their respective amount of radiation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA chest phantom containing 93 simulated lung nodules was scanned using five different protocols: ULD (80 kVp/30 mA), LD A (120 kVp/20 mA), LD B (100 kVp/30 mA), LD C (120 kVp/30 mA), and CCT (120 kVp/automatic mA). Four chest radiologists analyzed a selected image from each protocol and registered in diagrams the nodules they detected. Kruskal-Wallis and McNemar's tests were performed to determine the difference in nodule detection. Equivalent doses were estimated by placing thermoluminescent dosimeters on the surface and inside the phantom.
resultsThere was no significant difference in lung nodules' detection when comparing ULD and LD protocols (
conclusionThere is no significant difference in simulated lung nodules' detection when comparing ULD and LD protocols, but both differ from CCT, especially when considering lower-attenuating nodules.
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.