ArticleJournal of imaging2026
Chest Radiography Optimization: Identifying the Optimal kV for Image Quality in a Phantom Study.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chest radiography remains one of the most frequently performed imaging examinations, highlighting the need for optimization of acquisition parameters to balance image quality and radiation dose. This study presents a phantom-based quantitative evaluation of chest radiography acquisition settings using a digital radiography system (AGFA DR 600). Measurements were performed at three tube voltage levels across simulated patient-equivalent thicknesses generated using PMMA slabs, with a Leeds TOR 15FG image quality phantom positioned centrally in the imaging setup. Image quality was quantitatively assessed using signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), which were calculated from mean pixel values obtained from repeated acquisitions. Radiation exposure was evaluated through estimation of entrance surface dose (ESD). The analysis demonstrated that dose-normalized performance metrics favored intermediate tube voltages for slim and average patient-equivalent thicknesses, while higher voltages were required to maintain image quality in obese-equivalent conditions. Overall, image quality and dose were found to be strongly dependent on the combined selection of tube voltage and phantom thickness. These findings indicate that modest adjustments to tube voltage selection may improve the balance between image quality and radiation dose in chest radiography. Nevertheless, as the present work is based on phantom measurements, further validation using clinical images and observer-based studies is required before any modification of routine radiographic practice.
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.