ArticleScientific reports2025
Unified total body CT image with multiple organ specific windowings: validating improved diagnostic accuracy and speed in trauma cases.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
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
Total-body CT scans are useful in saving trauma patients; however, interpreting numerous images with varied window settings slows injury detection. We developed an algorithm for "unified total-body CT image with multiple organ-specific windowings (Uni-CT)", and assessing its impact on physician accuracy and speed in trauma CT interpretation. From November 7, 2008, to June 19, 2020, 40 cases of total-body CT images for blunt trauma with multiple injuries, were collected from the emergency department of Osaka General Medical Center and randomly divided into two groups. In half of the cases, the Uni-CT algorithm using semantic segmentation assigned visibility-friendly window settings to each organ. Four physicians with varying levels of experience interpreted 20 cases using the algorithm and 20 cases in conventional settings. The performance was analyzed based on the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity of the target findings, and diagnosis speed. In the proposal and conventional groups, patients had an average of 2.6 and 2.5 targeting findings, mean ages of 51.8 and 57.7 years, and male proportions of 60% and 45%, respectively. The agreement rate for physicians' diagnoses was κ = 0.70. Average accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of target findings were 84.8%, 74.3%, 96.9% and 85.5%, 81.2%, 91.5%, respectively, with no significant differences. Diagnostic speed per case averaged 71.9 and 110.4 s in each group (p < 0.05). The Uni-CT algorithm improved the diagnostic speed of total-body CT for trauma, maintaining accuracy comparable to that of conventional methods.
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.