ArticleCureus2023
Effect of a Motion Artifact Correction System on Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Image Characteristics.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- CBCT Dose Is Reduced with Angular Tube Current Modulation While Maintaining Image Quality and Reducing Photon Starvation Artifacts.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDetermine the effect of the motion correction system on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image quality parameters, artifacts, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) using different motion settings. MATERIALS AND
methodsA customized phantom insert array was prepared using SEDENTEX CT IQ Phantom (Leeds Test Objects, Yorkshire, England) stabilized over a rotating electric turntable. Thirty baseline CBCT scans were acquired with standardized technique factors on the ProMax 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) machine using combinations of different motion settings, including no motion, three- and six-degree motion, and with and without the use of a motion correction system. The standardized images were exported to ImageJ software. Image quality parameters, artifacts, and CNR values were evaluated and compared among the different acquisition settings.
resultsThe use of the motion correction system algorithm compared with the different motion settings showed a statistically significant difference for all the parameters (p<0.05) except for artifact values for six-degree motion (p<0.07). The effect of different motion settings on the parameters was not statistically significant.
conclusionThe use of a motion correction system, a proprietary algorithm-based system incorporated in the ProMax 3D CBCT unit, deteriorates the image quality characteristics evaluated in this in vitro study, namely artifact value and CNR. Its use in clinical settings might be limited to situations where patient motion is expected and appropriate head stabilization is not possible due to age or disease.
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.