Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40928606›Full record

ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2025

Clinical evaluation of motion robust reconstruction using deep learning in lung CT.

Shiho Kuwajima, Daisuke Oura

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Shiho KuwajimaDepartment of Radiology, Otaru General Hospital, Otaru, Hokkaido, Japan.
Daisuke OuraDepartment of Radiology, Otaru General Hospital, Otaru, Hokkaido, Japan. daisu.k.oura@otaru-general-hospital.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3143-7577

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In lung CT imaging, motion artifacts caused by cardiac motion and respiration are common. Recently, CLEAR Motion, a deep learning-based reconstruction method that applies motion correction technology, has been developed. This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the clinical usefulness of CLEAR Motion. A total of 129 lung CT was analyzed, and heart rate, height, weight, and BMI of all patients were obtained from medical records. Images with and without CLEAR Motion were reconstructed, and quantitative evaluation was performed using variance of Laplacian (VL) and PSNR. The difference in VL (DVL) between the two reconstruction methods was used to evaluate which part of the lung field (upper, middle, or lower) CLEAR Motion is effective. To evaluate the effect of motion correction based on patient characteristics, the correlation between body mass index (BMI), heart rate and DVL was determined. Visual assessment of motion artifacts was performed using paired comparisons by 9 radiological technologists. With the exception of one case, VL was higher in CLEAR Motion. Almost all the cases (110 cases) showed large DVL in the lower part. BMI showed a positive correlation with DVL (r = 0.55, p < 0.05), while no differences in DVL were observed based on heart rate. The average PSNR was 35.8 ± 0.92 dB. Visual assessments indicated that CLEAR Motion was preferred in most cases, with an average preference score of 0.96 (p < 0.05). Using Clear Motion allows for obtaining images with fewer motion artifacts in lung CT.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLungTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedArtifactsBody Mass IndexFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMovementDeep learning reconstructionLaplacianLung CTMotion artifactsMotion correction

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.