ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultra-Low Dose CT Compared to Standard Dose CT for Identification of Fresh Rib Fractures by Deep Learning Algorithm.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of rib fracture detection in forensic post-mortem photon counting CT.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low dose computed tomography (ULD-CT) compared to standard dose computed tomography (SD-CT) in discerning recent rib fractures using a deep learning algorithm detection of rib fractures (DLADRF). A total of 158 patients undergoing forensic diagnosis for rib fractures were included in this study: 50 underwent SD-CT, and 108 were assessed using ULD-CT. Junior and senior radiologists independently evaluated the images to identify and characterize the rib fractures. The sensitivity of rib fracture diagnosis by radiologists and radiologist + DLADRF was better using SD-CT than ULD-CT. However, the diagnosis sensitivity of DLADRF using ULD-CT alone was slightly more than SD-CT. Nonetheless, no substantial differences were observed in specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value between SD-CT and ULD-CT by the same radiologist, radiologist + DLADRF, and DLADRF (P > 0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic indicated that senior radiologist + DLADRF was significantly better than senior and junior radiologists, junior radiologists + DLADRF, and DLADRF alone using SD-CT or ULD-CT (all P < 0.05). Also, junior radiologists + DLADRF was better with ULD-CT than senior and junior radiologists (P < 0.05). The AUC of the rib fracture diagnosed by senior radiologists did not differ from DLADRF using ULD-CT. Also, no significant differences were observed between junior + AI and senior and between junior and DLADRF using SD-CT. DLADRF enhanced the diagnostic performance of radiologists in detecting recent rib fractures. The diagnostic outcomes between SD-CT and ULD-CT across radiologists' experience and DLADRF did not differ significantly.
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.