Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36146380›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Image Recovery from Synthetic Noise Artifacts in CT Scans Using Modified U-Net.

Rudy Gunawan, Yvonne Tran, Jinchuan Zheng, Hung Nguyen, Rifai Chai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rudy GunawanSchool of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia.
Yvonne TranMacquarie University Hearing (MU Hearing), Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW 2109, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1741-4205
Jinchuan ZhengSchool of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0550-9223
Hung NguyenSchool of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3373-8178
Rifai ChaiSchool of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1922-7024

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computed Tomography (CT) is commonly used for cancer screening as it utilizes low radiation for the scan. One problem with low-dose scans is the noise artifacts associated with low photon count that can lead to a reduced success rate of cancer detection during radiologist assessment. The noise had to be removed to restore detail clarity. We propose a noise removal method using a new model Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). Even though the network training time is long, the result is better than other CNN models in quality score and visual observation. The proposed CNN model uses a stacked modified U-Net with a specific number of feature maps per layer to improve the image quality, observable on an average PSNR quality score improvement out of 174 images. The next best model has 0.54 points lower in the average score. The score difference is less than 1 point, but the image result is closer to the full-dose scan image. We used separate testing data to clarify that the model can handle different noise densities. Besides comparing the CNN configuration, we discuss the denoising quality of CNN compared to classical denoising in which the noise characteristics affect quality.

Indexed as

ArtifactsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRadiation DosageSignal-To-Noise RatioTomography, X-Ray Computeddenoisinglung cancernoise artifacts

Identifiers

PMID36146380
PMCPMC9505882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.