ArticleJournal of biomedical physics & engineering2022
Impact of ROI Size on the Accuracy of Noise Measurement in CT on Computational and ACR Phantoms.
Article in Journal of biomedical physics & engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of image quality and detectability in computed tomography: Inter-laboratory comparison of Fourier-based metrics.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Objective assessment of diagnostic image quality in CT scans: what radiologists and researchers need to know.Insights into imaging · 2025Review
- Creating a Foundation for the Visualization of Intracranial Cerebrospinal Fluid Using Photon-Counting Technology in Spectral Imaging for Cranial CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Impact of Noise Level on the Accuracy of Automated Measurement of CT Number Linearity on ACR CT and Computational Phantoms.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effect of region of interest (ROI) size variation on producing accurate noise levels is not yet studied. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of ROI sizes on the accuracy of noise measurement in computed tomography (CT) by using images of a computational and American College of Radiology (ACR) phantoms. Material and Methods: In this experimental study, two phantoms were used, including computational and ACR phantoms. A computational phantom was developed by using Matlab R215a software (Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA Natick, MA) with a homogeneously +100 Hounsfield Unit (HU) value and an added-Gaussian noise with various levels of 5, 10, 25, 50, 75, and 100 HU. The ACR phantom was scanned with a Philips MX-16 slice CT scanner in different slice thicknesses of 1.5, 3, 5, and 7 mm to obtain noise variation. Noise measurement was conducted at the center of the phantom images and four locations close to the edge of the phantom images using different ROI sizes from 3 × 3 to 41 × 41 pixels, with an increased size of 2 × 2 pixels. Results: The use of a minimum ROI size of 21 × 21 pixels shows noise in the range of ± 5% ground truth noise. The measured noise increases above the ± 5% range if the used ROI is smaller than 21 × 21 pixels. Conclusion: A minimum acceptable ROI size is required to maintain the accuracy of noise measurement with a size of 21 × 21 pixels.
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.