ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2024
Development and validation of the effective CNR analysis method for evaluating the contrast resolution of CT images.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2024. 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.
- Differentiating Hemorrhage and Contrast Extravasation After Mechanical Thrombectomy Using Virtual Non-Contrast Photon-Counting CT.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Article
- A comparison of the image quality between deep learning reconstruction algorithm and iDose4 using low dose abdominopelvic computed tomography for individuals with normal BMI.SAGE open 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contrast resolution is an important index for evaluating the signal detectability of computed tomographic (CT) images. Recently, various noise reduction algorithms, such as iterative reconstruction (IR) and deep learning reconstruction (DLR), have been proposed to reduce the image noise in CT images. However, these algorithms cause changes in the image noise texture and blurred image signals in CT images. Furthermore, the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) cannot be accurately evaluated in CT images reconstructed using noise reduction methods. Therefore, in this study, we devised a new method, namely, "effective CNR analysis," for evaluating the contrast resolution of CT images. We verified whether the proposed algorithm could evaluate the effective contrast resolution based on the signal detectability of CT images. The findings showed that the effective CNR values obtained using the proposed method correlated well with the subjective visual impressions of CT images. To investigate whether signal detectability was appropriately evaluated using effective CNR analysis, the conventional CNR analysis method was compared with the proposed method. The CNRs of the IR and DLR images calculated using conventional CNR analysis were 13.2 and 10.7, respectively. By contrast, those calculated using the effective CNR analysis were estimated to be 0.7 and 1.1, respectively. Considering that the signal visibility of DLR images was superior to that of IR images, our proposed effective CNR analysis was shown to be appropriate for evaluating the contrast resolution of CT images.
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.