Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34142867›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2021

Superior objective and subjective image quality of deep learning reconstruction for low-dose abdominal CT imaging in comparison with model-based iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection.

Akio Tamura, Eisuke Mukaida, Yoshitaka Ota, Masayoshi Kamata, Shun Abe, Kunihiro Yoshioka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Akio TamuraDepartment of Radiology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Iwate, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9605-721X
Eisuke MukaidaDepartment of Radiology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Iwate, Japan.
Yoshitaka OtaDivision of Central Radiology, Iwate Medical University Hospital, Iwate, Japan.
Masayoshi KamataDivision of Central Radiology, Iwate Medical University Hospital, Iwate, Japan.
Shun AbeDivision of Central Radiology, Iwate Medical University Hospital, Iwate, Japan.
Kunihiro YoshiokaDepartment of Radiology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Iwate, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to conduct objective and subjective comparisons of image quality among abdominal computed tomography (CT) reconstructions with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithms, model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), and filtered back projection (FBP).

methodsDatasets from consecutive patients who underwent low-dose liver CT were retrospectively identified. Images were reconstructed using DLR, MBIR, and FBP. Mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and noise, artifacts, sharpness, and overall image quality were subjectively assessed. Dunnett's test was used for statistical comparisons.

resultsNinety patients (67 ± 12.7 years; 63 males; mean body mass index [BMI], 25.5 kg/m

conclusionsBased on objective and subjective comparisons, the image quality of DLR was found to be superior to that of MBIR and FBP on low-dose abdominal CT. DLR was the only method for which image noise was not higher for obese patients than for those with a normal BMI. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study provides previously unavailable information on the properties of DLR systems and their clinical utility.

Indexed as

Deep LearningAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArtifactsContrast MediaFemaleHumansLiverMaleMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiography, AbdominalRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID34142867
PMCPMC8248220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.