ArticlePloS one2026
Comparison of stationary digital chest tomosynthesis to portable chest radiographs: A patient study.
Article in PloS one, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPortable chest radiographs are a vital tool for clinical evaluation. However, their value remains limited due to overlapping anatomical structures obscuring underlying pathologies. Chest tomosynthesis has been proposed as an alternative to CT for high resolution chest imaging; however, a portable tomosynthesis unit is currently lacking in the standard of care. Utilizing a carbon nanotube linear x-ray source array, our team has developed a stationary digital chest tomosynthesis (s-DCT) unit that enables tomosynthesis imaging without need for a moving x-ray source during image acquisition. PURPOSE: The goal of our study was to evaluate the performance of portable s-DCT in patients with concurrent portable radiographs and recent cross-sectional chest CT imaging.
methodsThis study recruited twenty-seven outpatients with recent chest CT images. Twenty-two patients were imaged with a conventional radiograph unit and the s-DCT system. Three board-certified thoracic radiologists rated their confidence in evaluating ten criteria: nine anatomic criteria and one on indwelling hardware. Readers were asked if information was gained from chest tomosynthesis, and if a follow-up CT was recommended. Random effects modeling was performed to assess factors contributing to reader confidence.
resultsTwenty-two adult patients were successfully imaged. Overall, reader confidence with s-DCT was significantly higher than CXR (p = < 0.001). Higher confidence in tomosynthesis was associated with perception that tomosynthesis gave additional information over CXR (p = 0.05). There was no significant trend toward not recommending a CT (p = 0.47).
conclusionStationary digital chest tomosynthesis is a superior alternative to portable chest x-ray for patients that cannot undergo CT examination.
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.