ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Focal spot motion in digital breast tomosynthesis and its effect on spatial resolution.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. 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.
- Focal spot motion in digital breast tomosynthesis and its effect on spatial resolution.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has become standard practice; however, the acquisition method of DBT between vendors is far from standardized. Currently, there are three commercially available DBT tube motion techniques: (1) continuous motion, (2) step-and-shoot, and (3) continuous motion with flying focal spot. Each of these methods represents a trade-off between total acquisition time and focal spot blur. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to characterize the increase in effective focal spot size in DBT relative to standard 2D projections and assess the influence of this increase on spatial resolution using the modulation transfer function (MTF).
methodsFocal spot size was measured for both a 2D acquisition and the 0° DBT projection using a 10 µm slit phantom. Imaging techniques were set to those used for a 2, 4, and 8 cm thick breast of 50/50 adipose/fat composition. MTF curves were measured using a copper edge phantom both at the breast support plane and 4 cm above the breast support.
resultsThe effective focal spot size increase from 2D to DBT increased with breast thickness for all systems. The continuous motion systems showed the greatest increase in effective focal spot size with percent increases of 101% to 462% depending on unit and breast thickness. The flying focal spot system showed the smallest increase in effective focal spot size in DBT acquisitions, being 3%, 21%, and 25% for a 2, 4, and 8 cm thick breast, respectively. The step-and-shoot and flying focal spot systems showed no degradation in MTF curves due to increasing effective focal spot size in DBT acquisitions, while the continuous motion systems showed a reduction in the frequency at which the MTF curve reached 50% of 26%-45%.
conclusionBoth step-and-shoot and flying focal spot systems minimized effective focal spot size increase in DBT acquisitions compared to continuous tube motion systems.
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.