ArticleHeliyon2023
Accuracy of attenuation coefficient measurement (ACM) for real-time ultrasound hepatic steatometry: Comparison of simulator/phantom data with magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF).
Article in Heliyon, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lipid Microparticle-Based Phantoms Modeling Hepatic Steatosis for the Validation of Quantitative Imaging Techniques.Small methods · 2025Article
- Inter- and Intraobserver variability of attenuation coefficient measurement in innovative ultrasound diagnosis of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Accuracy of attenuation coefficient measurement (ACM) for hepatic steatosis: comparison with MRI proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) and chemical fat analysis using multimodal liver fat phantoms.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of real time ultrasound (US) steatometry with the Attenuation Coefficient (AC) measurement in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging with proton density software module (MRI-PDFF). Methods: This study was conducted between January 2021 and October 2021. The comparison of instrumental methods for assessing and grading hepatic steatosis using a multimodal phantom simulator of different fat and water ratios was performed. The study involved 3 radiological centers. The steatophantom was simultaneously investigated using three methods: magnetic resonance imaging with proton density software module (MRI-PDFF) and 128-slice multidetector computed tomography, and then by 2 different US scanner for steatosis assessment via Measurement Attenuation Imaging (ATI) ant Attenuation Coefficient Measurement (ACM). Results: Modeling of hepatic steatosis using a series of phantom simulators allows evidence-based medicine to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the latest US techniques for steatosis. The ACM and ATI of both US systems on phantoms correlated well with each other and with MRI-PDFF and, thus, can provide good diagnostic value in the assessment of hepatic steatosis. MDCT was less sensitive to mild steatosis than AC and MRI-PDFF. Conclusion: Measurement of ACs in US studies by devices from different vendors compared to other modalities of radiological imaging (MDCT and MRI-PDFF) by special phantoms is an accurate and promising method for noninvasive quantification of hepatic steatosis.
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.