Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41417126›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Hunting for signal in the noise: identifying robust CT radiomic features across variable scanning settings.

Emanuele Barabino, Michele Tosques, Andrea Pacini Battaglia, Gianluca Ficarra, Giovanni Rossi, Alessandro Fedeli, Carlo Genova, Giuseppe Cittadini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2026. 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

8 authors.

Emanuele BarabinoDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy. emanuele.barabino@hsanmartino.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6407-5878
Michele TosquesDepartment of Neuroradiology, ASL2 Savonese, Ospedale Santa Corona, Pietra Ligure, Italy.
Andrea Pacini BattagliaDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), Università di Genova, Genova, Italy.
Gianluca FicarraDepartment of Radiology, ASL2 Savonese, Ospedale San Paolo, Savona, Italy.
Giovanni RossiU.O.S. Tumori Polmonari, Oncologia Medica 2, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Alessandro FedeliDepartment of Electrical, Electronic, Telecommunications Engineering, and Naval Architecture, University of Genoa, Genova, Italy.
Carlo GenovaDepartment of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Giuseppe CittadiniDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesRadiomics offers the potential to derive quantitative biomarkers from medical images, but its clinical implementation remains limited by poor reproducibility and uncertainty about whether features capture true biological signals or merely reflect noise. This study systematically evaluated the repeatability of CT radiomic features from a biological phantom to identify features that are both reproducible and informative. MATERIALS AND

methodsA bovine phantom was analyzed to assess the reproducibility of radiomic features across different acquisition and reconstruction settings. Radiomic features were extracted and classified as "Reliable," "Variable," or "Unreliable" based on their repeatability and comparison with air. The results of this analysis were compared with those from a similar experiment performed at another institution to evaluate inter-site consistency. Finally, cross-referenced results from the phantom analyses were validated in a clinical scenario.

resultsAcross different slice thicknesses, the number of "Reliable" features was higher in thinner-slice datasets and further improved after voxel resampling, while thicker slices showed inconsistent effects. The comparison between the two phantom experiments demonstrated moderate agreement, highlighting variability across acquisition settings but also identifying a consistent subset of robust features. In the clinical test, 83.3% of the "Reliable" features overlapped with those identified in the phantom experiments, confirming the reproducibility of the selected features in a real-world scenario.

conclusionCombining repeatability analysis with the noise sensitivity test offers a practical approach to identify robust radiomic features, improving feature selection and model reliability. Further validation is needed to refine thresholds and confirm clinical applicability. KEY POINTS: Question Radiomic features may capture structured noise rather than true biological signal. Identifying which features are genuinely informative remains a major unmet need in radiomics research. Findings Combining repeatability analysis with a noise sensitivity test allowed systematic identification of robust and informative CT radiomic features across multiple acquisition and reconstruction settings. Clinical relevance By distinguishing reproducible and biologically meaningful radiomic features from noise-driven ones, this approach can improve the reliability and generalizability of radiomics-based models, supporting more accurate and trustworthy imaging biomarkers for clinical decision-making and personalized patient care.

Indexed as

Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAnimalsCattleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPhantoms, ImagingRadiomicsReproducibility of ResultsSignal-To-Noise RatioBiomarkers (imaging)Image interpretation (computer-assisted)Phantoms (imaging)Tomography (x-ray computed)

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.