ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Assessment of Image Quality Performance of a Photon-Counting Computed Tomography Scanner Approved for Whole-Body Clinical Applications.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Understanding Photon-Counting CT: Physics, Detector Technology, and Image Reconstructions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhoton-counting computed tomography (PCCT) represents a major technological advance in clinical CT imaging, offering superior spatial resolution, enhanced material discrimination, and potential radiation dose reduction compared to conventional energy-integrating detector systems. As the first clinically approved PCCT scanner becomes available, establishing a comprehensive characterization of its image quality is essential to understand its performance and clinical impact.
methodsImage quality was evaluated using a commercial quality assurance phantom with acquisition protocols typically used for three anatomical regions-head, abdomen/thorax, and inner ear-representing diverse clinical scenarios. Each region was scanned using both ultra-high-resolution (UHR, 120 × 0.2 mm slices) and conventional (144 × 0.4 mm slices) protocols. Conventional metrics, including signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), slice thickness accuracy, and uniformity, were assessed following international standards. Task-based analysis was also performed through target transfer function (TTF), noise power spectrum (NPS), and detectability index (d') to evaluate diagnostic relevance.
resultsUHR protocols provided markedly improved spatial resolution, particularly in the inner ear imaging, as confirmed by TTF analysis, though with increased noise and reduced low-contrast detectability in certain conditions. CT numbers showed linear correspondence with known attenuation coefficients across all protocols.
conclusionsThis study establishes a detailed technical characterization of the first clinical PCCT scanner, demonstrating significant improvements in terms of spatial resolution and accuracy of the quantitative image analysis, while highlighting the need for noise-contrast optimization in high-resolution imaging.
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.