ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2022
Automatic coronary artery calcium scoring on routine chest computed tomography (CT): comparison of a deep learning algorithm and a dedicated calcium scoring CT.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying the impact of slice thickness on cardiovascular risk stratification in lung cancer screening: a multi-center "RESCUE" study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- A Novel Fully Automated Deep Learning Model for Coronary Artery Calcification Detection on Computed Tomography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Non-ECG-Gated Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Article
- Deep learning models for CT image classification: a comprehensive literature review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Review
- Sex differences in features of atherosclerotic plaques as revealed by various imaging techniques: historical review.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Performance assessment of an artificial intelligence-based coronary artery calcium scoring algorithm in non-gated chest CT scans of different slice thickness.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Automated detection and classification of coronary atherosclerotic plaques on coronary CT angiography using deep learning algorithm.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Coronary computed tomography angiography analysis using artificial intelligence for stenosis quantification and stent segmentation: a multicenter study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Influence of computed tomography slice thickness on deep learning-based, automatic coronary artery calcium scoring software performance.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Association of epicardial adipose tissue volume with increased risk of hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Coronary artery calcium score scan at 100 kVp with tin filtration (Sn100 kVp) prior to coronary computed tomography angiography for overall radiation dose reduction: a prospective cohort study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- Enhancing coronary artery plaque analysis via artificial intelligence-driven cardiovascular computed tomography.Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and accuracy of automatic coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring and risk classification in non-gated, non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) of different slice thicknesses using a deep learning algorithm. Methods: This retrospective study was performed at 2 tertiary hospitals. Paired, dedicated calcium-scoring CT scans and non-gated, non-contrast chest CT scans taken within a month from the same patients were included. Chest CT images were grouped according to the slice thickness (group A: 1 mm; group B: 3 mm). For internal scans, the CAC score manually measured on dedicated calcium scoring CT images was used as the gold standard. The deep learning algorithm for group A was trained using 150 chest CT scans and tested using 144 scans, and that for group B was trained using 170 chest CT scans and tested using 144 scans. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the correlation between the algorithm and the gold standard. Agreement between the deep learning algorithm, the manual results on chest CT, and the gold standard was determined by Bland-Altman analysis. Cardiac risk categories were compared. External validation was performed on 334 paired scans from a different organization. Results: A total of 608 internal paired scans (1 mm: 294; 3 mm: 314) of 406 individuals and 334 external paired scans (1 mm: 117; 3 mm: 117) of 117 individuals were included in the analysis. The ICCs between the deep learning algorithm and the gold standard were excellent in both group A (0.90; 95% CI: 0.85-0.93) and group B (0.94; 95% CI: 0.92-0.96). The Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement in both groups. For the cardiovascular risk category, the deep learning algorithm accurately classified 71% of cases in group A and 81% of cases in group B. The Kappa values for risk classification were 0.72 in group A and 0.82 in group B. External validation yielded equally good results. Conclusions: The automatic calculation of CAC score and cardiovascular risk stratification on non-gated chest CT using a deep learning algorithm was reliable and accurate on both 1 and 3 mm scans. Chest CT with a slice thickness of 3 mm was slightly more accurate in CAC detection and risk classification.
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.