ArticleRadiological physics and technology2025
Influence of the number of images on threshold image contrast measurements with a phantom with gold disks in digital mammography.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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.
- CDMAM phantom for Image Quality Assessment and Quality Control in digital mammography: A narrative review.Medical physics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Image quality, in addition to radiation dose, is the most important physical parameter in digital mammography. Image quality should be periodically monitored using the CDMAM phantom. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of the number of analyzed images on the result of threshold image contrast measurements using the CDMAM phantom in different versions. The images obtained using two versions of the CDMAM phantom, i.e., 3.4 and 4.0, were analyzed. The image analysis was performed and repeated 10 times for 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, and 32 images from a pool of 43 images, separately for each phantom. For the CDMAM 3.4 phantom, a statistical difference was demonstrated between the following groups: S2 vs S6 (p < 0.006), S6 vs S16 (p < 0.001), S6 vs S24 (p < 0.002), S6 vs S32 (p < 0.021), S8 vs S16 (p < 0.019), S8 vs S24 (p < 0.048). For the CDMAM 4.0 phantom, a statistically significant difference was demonstrated between all groups and the N2 group (p < 0.000). For the CDMAM 3.4 phantom, the most favorable number of images required for analysis cannot be clearly determined. For the CDMAM 4.0 phantom, it is recommended to perform 24 images for analysis. Particular attention should be paid when determining the threshold image contrast for a disk diameter of 0.1 mm, as this parameter is used during exposure automation control.
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.