Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40137202›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2025

The Effect of Simulated Dose Reduction on the Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Chest Radiography.

Hendrik Erenstein, Wim P Krijnen, Annemieke van der Heij-Meijer, Peter van Ooijen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hendrik ErensteinDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, 9714 CA Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9029-576X
Wim P KrijnenResearch Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, 9714 CA Groningen, The Netherlands.
Annemieke van der Heij-MeijerDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, 9714 CA Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter van OoijenDepartment of Radiotherapy, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8995-1210

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chest imaging plays a pivotal role in screening and monitoring patients, and various predictive artificial intelligence (AI) models have been developed in support of this. However, little is known about the effect of decreasing the radiation dose and, thus, image quality on AI performance. This study aims to design a low-dose simulation and evaluate the effect of this simulation on the performance of CNNs in plain chest radiography. Seven pathology labels and corresponding images from Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care datasets were used to train AI models at two spatial resolutions. These 14 models were tested using the original images, 50% and 75% low-dose simulations. We compared the area under the receiver operator characteristic (AUROC) of the original images and both simulations using DeLong testing. The average absolute change in AUROC related to simulated dose reduction for both resolutions was <0.005, and none exceeded a change of 0.014. Of the 28 test sets, 6 were significantly different. An assessment of predictions, performed through the splitting of the data by gender and patient positioning, showed a similar trend. The effect of simulated dose reductions on CNN performance, although significant in 6 of 28 cases, has minimal clinical impact. The effect of patient positioning exceeds that of dose reduction.

Indexed as

AIchest radiographydose reductionimage qualitynoise

Identifiers

PMID40137202
PMCPMC11943096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.