ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2022
0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off-centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automatic patient centering in computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of wearing a brassiere during low-dose chest CT for lung cancer screening.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- The Impacts of Vertical Off-Centring, Localiser Direction, Phantom Positioning and Tube Voltage on CT Number Accuracy: An Experimental Study.Journal of imaging · 2022Article
- 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off-centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2022Article
- Impacts of Phantom Off-Center Positioning on CT Numbers and Dose Index CTDIv: An Evaluation of Two CT Scanners from GE.Journal of imaging · 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient positioning is an essential consideration for the optimisation of radiation dose during CT examinations. The study objectives seek to explore the effects of vertical off-centring, localiser direction (0° and 180°), and phantom positioning (supine and prone) on radiation dose, using three different tube voltages in multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) imaging.
methodsThe trunk of a PBU-60 anthropomorphic phantom was imaged using a Discovery CT750 HD - 128 slice (GE Healthcare). Images employing 0° and 180° localisers were acquired in supine and prone orientation for each combination of vertical off-centring (±100, ±60 and ±30 mm) and different tube voltages (80, 120 and 140 kVp), using the system's automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) function. The displayed volume CT dose index (CTDI
resultsWith incremental table off-centring of ±100 mm, the dose at 120 kVp in the supine position ranged from 63% to 196% (0° localiser) and from 66% to 191% (180° localiser) as compared to iso-centre. While in the prone position, the dose ranged from 62% to 195% (0° localiser); and 62% to 193% (180° localiser), with a notable dose increase at higher tube voltages. Dose variation and vertical off-centring showed a significant relationship for both 0° and 180° localisers (r = 0.94 and 0.96, respectively, P < 0.001). The CTDI
conclusionsPhantom off-centring and localiser direction evidenced large dose variation. It is recommended that the 0° localiser is employed during CT examinations, in order to minimise the potential additional radiation dose which may result from off-centring and the use of lower tube voltages where clinically appropriate.
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.