ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Deep learning reconstruction improves computer-aided pulmonary nodule detection and measurement accuracy for ultra-low-dose chest CT.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anatomical-Contextual YOLOv8-YOLOv12 Framework for Pulmonary Nodule Detection in CT: Multi-Organ Learning and Cross-Dataset Validation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Feasibility of BMI-based sub-milliSievert low-dose CT in individualized detection of lung nodules.European radiology · 2026Article
- Pediatric lung ground glass nodules: a real-world, large-scale CT cohort analysis.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Emerging technologies in thoracic surgery: artificial intelligence, robotic-assisted surgery, and telesurgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the image quality and pulmonary nodule detectability and measurement accuracy between deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) of chest ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT). MATERIALS AND
methodsParticipants who underwent chest standard-dose CT (SDCT) followed by ULDCT from October 2020 to January 2022 were prospectively included. ULDCT images reconstructed with HIR and DLR were compared with SDCT images to evaluate image quality, nodule detection rate, and measurement accuracy using a commercially available deep learning-based nodule evaluation system. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate the percentage errors of nodule size and nodule volume between HIR and DLR images.
resultsEighty-four participants (54 ± 13 years; 26 men) were finally enrolled. The effective radiation doses of ULDCT and SDCT were 0.16 ± 0.02 mSv and 1.77 ± 0.67 mSv, respectively (P < 0.001). The mean ± standard deviation of the lung tissue noises was 61.4 ± 3.0 HU for SDCT, 61.5 ± 2.8 HU and 55.1 ± 3.4 HU for ULDCT reconstructed with HIR-Strong setting (HIR-Str) and DLR-Strong setting (DLR-Str), respectively (P < 0.001). A total of 535 nodules were detected. The nodule detection rates of ULDCT HIR-Str and ULDCT DLR-Str were 74.0% and 83.4%, respectively (P < 0.001). The absolute percentage error in nodule volume from that of SDCT was 19.5% in ULDCT HIR-Str versus 17.9% in ULDCT DLR-Str (P < 0.001).
conclusionCompared with HIR, DLR reduced image noise, increased nodule detection rate, and improved measurement accuracy of nodule volume at chest ULDCT. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.