ArticlePloS one2024
Simulated low-dose dark-field radiography for detection of COVID-19 pneumonia.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Assessment of emphysema with simulated low-dose dark-field radiography.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Deformable image registration of dark-field chest radiographs for functional lung assessment.Medical physics · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDark-field radiography has been proven to be a promising tool for the assessment of various lung diseases. PURPOSE: To evaluate the potential of dose reduction in dark-field chest radiography for the detection of the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pneumonia. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients aged at least 18 years with a medically indicated chest computed tomography scan (CT scan) were screened for participation in a prospective study between October 2018 and December 2020. Patients were included if they had a CO-RADS (COVID-19 Reporting and Data System) score ≥ 4 (COVID-19 group) or if they had no pathologic lung changes (controls). A total of 89 participants with a median age of 60 years (interquartile range 48 to 68 yrs.) were included in this study. Dark-field and attenuation-based radiographs were simultaneously obtained by using a prototype system for dark-field radiography. By modifying the image reconstruction algorithm, low-dose radiographs were simulated based on real participant images. The simulated radiographs corresponded to 50%, 25%, and 13% of the full dose (41.9 μSv, median value). Four experienced radiologists served as blinded readers assessing both image modalities, displayed side by side in random order. The presence of COVID-19-associated lung changes was rated on a scale from 1 to 6. The readers' diagnostic performance was evaluated by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) using Obuchowski's method. Also, the dark-field images were analyzed quantitatively by comparing the dark-field coefficients within and between the COVID-19 and the control group.
resultsThe readers' diagnostic performance in the image evaluation, as described by the AUC value (where a value of 1 corresponds to perfect diagnostic accuracy), did not differ significantly between the full dose images (AUC = 0.86) and the simulated images at 50% (AUC = 0.86) and 25% of the full dose(AUC = 0.84) (p>0.050), but was slightly lower at 13% dose (AUC = 0.82) (p = 0.038). For all four radiation dose levels, the median dark-field coefficients within groups were identical but different significantly by 15% between the controls and the COVID-19 pneumonia group (p<0.001).
conclusionDark-field imaging can be used to diagnose the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pneumonia with a median dose of 10.5 μSv, which corresponds to 25% of the original dose used for dark-field chest imaging.
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.