ArticleEuropean radiology2023
X-ray dark-field chest radiography: a reader study to evaluate the diagnostic quality of attenuation chest X-rays from a dual-contrast scanning prototype.
Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dark-field X-ray imaging for the assessment of osteoporosis in human lumbar spine specimens.Frontiers in physiology · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the visibility of anatomical structures and overall quality of the attenuation images obtained with a dark-field X-ray radiography prototype with those from a commercial radiography system.
methodsEach of the 65 patients recruited for this study obtained a thorax radiograph at the prototype and a reference radiograph at the commercial system. Five radiologists independently assessed the visibility of anatomical structures, the level of motion artifacts, and the overall image quality of all attenuation images on a five-point scale, with 5 points being the highest rating. The average scores were compared between the two image types. The differences were evaluated using an area under the curve (AUC) based z-test with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. To assess the variability among the images, the distributions of the average scores per image were compared between the systems.
resultsThe overall image quality was rated high for both devices, 4.2 for the prototype and 4.6 for the commercial system. The rating scores varied only slightly between both image types, especially for structures relevant to lung assessment, where the images from the commercial system were graded slightly higher. The differences were statistically significant for all criteria except for the bronchial structures, the cardiophrenic recess, and the carina.
conclusionsThe attenuation images acquired with the prototype were assigned a high diagnostic quality despite a lower resolution and the presence of motion artifacts. Thus, the attenuation-based radiographs from the prototype can be used for diagnosis, eliminating the need for an additional conventional radiograph. KEY POINTS: • Despite a low tube voltage (70 kVp) and comparably long acquisition time, the attenuation images from the dark-field chest radiography system achieved diagnostic quality for lung assessment. • Commercial chest radiographs obtained a mean rating score regarding their diagnostic quality of 4.6 out of 5, and the grating-based images had a slightly lower mean rating score of 4.2 out of 5. • The difference in rating scores for anatomical structures relevant to lung assessment is below 5%.
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.