ArticleRadiological physics and technology2024
Subjective and objective image quality of low-dose CT images processed using a self-supervised denoising algorithm.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the subjective and objective image quality of low-dose computed tomography (CT) images processed using a self-supervised denoising algorithm with deep learning. We trained the self-supervised denoising model using low-dose CT images of 40 patients and applied this model to CT images of another 30 patients. Image quality, in terms of noise and edge sharpness, was rated on a 5-point scale by two radiologists. The coefficient of variation, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were calculated. The values for the self-supervised denoising model were compared with those for the original low-dose CT images and CT images processed using other conventional denoising algorithms (non-local means, block-matching and 3D filtering, and total variation minimization-based algorithms). The mean (standard deviation) scores of local and overall noise levels for the self-supervised denoising algorithm were 3.90 (0.40) and 3.93 (0.51), respectively, outperforming the original image and other algorithms. Similarly, the mean scores of local and overall edge sharpness for the self-supervised denoising algorithm were 3.90 (0.40) and 3.75 (0.47), respectively, surpassing the scores of the original image and other algorithms. The CNR and SNR for the self-supervised denoising algorithm were higher than those for the original images but slightly lower than those for the other algorithms. Our findings indicate the potential clinical applicability of the self-supervised denoising algorithm for low-dose CT images in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38413510What 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.