ArticleIEEE transactions on medical imaging2024
Non-Isocentric Geometry for Next-Generation Tomosynthesis With Super-Resolution.
Article in IEEE transactions on medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phantom studies in medical imaging (PSMI): a guide with recommendations and checklist.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Container applications for the development and integration of virtual imaging platforms.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Assessment of Volumetric Dense Tissue Segmentation in Tomosynthesis Using Deep Virtual Clinical Trials.Pattern recognition · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Our lab at the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) is investigating novel designs for digital breast tomosynthesis. We built a next-generation tomosynthesis system with a non-isocentric geometry (superior-to-inferior detector motion). This paper examines four metrics of image quality affected by this design. First, aliasing was analyzed in reconstructions prepared with smaller pixelation than the detector. Aliasing was assessed with a theoretical model of r -factor, a metric calculating amplitudes of alias signal relative to input signal in the Fourier transform of the reconstruction of a sinusoidal object. Aliasing was also assessed experimentally with a bar pattern (illustrating spatial variations in aliasing) and 360°-star pattern (illustrating directional anisotropies in aliasing). Second, the point spread function (PSF) was modeled in the direction perpendicular to the detector to assess out-of-plane blurring. Third, power spectra were analyzed in an anthropomorphic phantom developed by UPenn and manufactured by Computerized Imaging Reference Systems (CIRS), Inc. (Norfolk, VA). Finally, calcifications were analyzed in the CIRS Model 020 BR3D Breast Imaging Phantom in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR); i.e., mean calcification signal relative to background-tissue noise. Image quality was generally superior in the non-isocentric geometry: Aliasing artifacts were suppressed in both theoretical and experimental reconstructions prepared with smaller pixelation than the detector. PSF width was also reduced at most positions. Anatomic noise was reduced. Finally, SNR in calcification detection was improved. (A potential trade-off of smaller-pixel reconstructions was reduced SNR; however, SNR was still improved by the detector-motion acquisition.) In conclusion, the non-isocentric geometry improved image quality in several ways.
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.