Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37207049›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2023

Learning effects in visual grading assessment of model-based reconstruction algorithms in abdominal Computed Tomography.

Bharti Kataria, Jenny Öman, Michael Sandborg, Örjan Smedby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Bharti KatariaDepartment of Radiology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Jenny ÖmanDepartment of Radiology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Michael SandborgDepartment of Health, Medicine & Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Örjan SmedbyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems (MTH), KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Images reconstructed with higher strengths of iterative reconstruction algorithms may impair radiologists' subjective perception and diagnostic performance due to changes in the amplitude of different spatial frequencies of noise. The aim of the present study was to ascertain if radiologists can learn to adapt to the unusual appearance of images produced by higher strengths of Advanced modeled iterative reconstruction algorithm (ADMIRE). Methods: Two previously published studies evaluated the performance of ADMIRE in non-contrast and contrast-enhanced abdominal CT. Images from 25 (first material) and 50 (second material) patients, were reconstructed with ADMIRE strengths 3, 5 (AD3, AD5) and filtered back projection (FBP). Radiologists assessed the images using image criteria from the European guidelines for quality criteria in CT. To ascertain if there was a learning effect, new analyses of data from the two studies was performed by introducing a time variable in the mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression model. Results: In both materials, a significant negative attitude to ADMIRE 5 at the beginning of the viewing was strengthened during the progress of the reviews for both liver parenchyma (first material: -0.70, Conclusions: With progression of reviews in both materials, an increasing dislike for ADMIRE 5 images was apparent for two image criteria. In this time perspective (weeks or months), no learning effect towards accepting the algorithm could be demonstrated.

Indexed as

AbdominalComputed tomographyImage qualityLearning effectPerceptionVisual grading

Identifiers

PMID37207049
PMCPMC10189366

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.