ReviewJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2021
Advances in ultrasonography: image formation and quality assessment.
Review in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and Fabrication of Multi-Frequency and Low-Quality-Factor Capacitive Micromachined Ultrasonic Transducers.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Harnessing chemically crosslinked microbubble clusters using deep learning for ultrasound contrast imaging.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Inter-System Variability of Eight Different Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) Devices-A Prospective Comparison of B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance in Intensive Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Design and Implementation of Analog-Digital Hybrid Beamformers for Low-Complexity Ultrasound Systems: A Feasibility Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Prospective Comparison of Handheld Ultrasound Devices from Different Manufacturers with Respect to B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance for Various Abdominal Sonography Questions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Delay-and-sum (DAS) beamforming is widely used for generation of B-mode images from echo signals obtained with an array probe composed of transducer elements. However, the resolution and contrast achieved with DAS beamforming are determined by the physical specifications of the array, e.g., size and pitch of elements. To overcome this limitation, adaptive imaging methods have recently been explored extensively thanks to the dissemination of digital and programmable ultrasound systems. On the other hand, it is also important to evaluate the performance of such adaptive imaging methods quantitatively to validate whether the modification of the image characteristics resulting from the developed method is appropriate. Since many adaptive imaging methods have been developed and they often alter image characteristics, attempts have also been made to update the methods for quantitative assessment of image quality. This article provides a review of recent developments in adaptive imaging and image quality assessment.
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.