ArticlePediatric radiology2021
Comparison of radiation dose and image quality between contrast-enhanced single- and dual-energy abdominopelvic computed tomography in children as a function of patient size.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-kVp techniques for radiation dose optimization in abdominopelvic contrast-enhanced CT: a scoping review.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Dual energy CT of pediatric genitourinary disorders.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Dual-energy computed tomography in children: Technique and clinical applications.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2025Review
- Performance Evaluation of Image Segmentation Using Dual-Energy Spectral CT Images with Deep Learning Image Reconstruction: A Phantom Study.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Dual-energy computed tomography: pediatric considerations.Pediatric radiology · 2024Review
- Spectral CT of the abdomen: Where are we now?Insights into imaging · 2021Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWidespread adoption of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) requires evidence it does not cause higher radiation dose than conventional single-energy CT (SECT). While a few publications involving pediatric patients exist, most have focused on small cohorts. Hence, there is still a need for studies that ascertain what radiation doses are expected in larger populations that include representative ranges of patient sizes and ages.
objectiveTo compare radiation dose and image quality of DECT and SECT abdominopelvic examinations in children as a function of patient size. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 860 children (age range: 12.3±5.3 years) who underwent contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic exams on second-generation dual-source CT in a five-year period. Two groups, SECT and DECT, consisting of 430 children each, were matched by 5 effective diameters. Volume CT dose index (CTDI
resultsDECT SSDEs were lower across all effective patient diameters compared with SECT (mean: 8.5±1.8 mGv vs. 9.3±2.0 mGv, respectively, P≤0.001). DECT CTDI
conclusionIn children, regardless of effective diameter, contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic DECT can be performed with a similar or lower dose and similar image quality compared with SECT examinations.
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.