Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42503053›Full record

ArticleRadiological physics and technology2026

Dose-report-driven body weight estimation in diagnostic CT using a practical machine learning framework.

Hajime Ichikawa, Norikazu Koori, Shota Ichikawa, Yasuhiro Sawane, Takayuki Shibutani, Mitsuaki Terabe, Naoki Kodama

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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

7 authors.

Hajime IchikawaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Kitaku, Niigata, Niigata, 9503198, Japan. hajime-ichikawa@nuhw.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5331-3391
Norikazu KooriDepartment of Radiological Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Kitaku, Niigata, Niigata, 9503198, Japan.
Shota IchikawaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Graduate School of Health Sciences, Niigata University, 2-746 Asahimachi-dori, Chuo-ku, Niigata, 9518518, Japan.
Yasuhiro SawaneDepartment of Radiology, Toyohashi Municipal Hospital, 50 Hakken nishi, Aotake-cho, Toyohashi, Aichi, 4418570, Japan.
Takayuki ShibutaniDepartment of Quantum Medical Technology, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, 5-11-80 Kodatsuno, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 9200942, Japan.
Mitsuaki TerabeDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showaku, Nagoya, Aichi, 4668560, Japan.
Naoki KodamaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Kitaku, Niigata, Niigata, 9503198, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In radiology practice, patient body weight is important for contrast media and radiopharmaceutical dosing, radiation dose management, and examination-related workflows, yet it is not consistently available in routine clinical settings. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of estimating adult body weight using diagnostic CT dose report metrics across CT systems. This retrospective single-center study included 2496 consecutive adults who underwent diagnostic CT on three scanners. Measured body weight served as the reference standard. LightGBM regression was evaluated in three settings: (1) a baseline model using dose report-derived patient size and exposure metrics, including water-equivalent diameter and sex; (2) an extended model additionally incorporating body region and CT system; and (3) scanner-wise cross-validation to assess cross-scanner generalizability. For settings 1 and 2, data were split into training, validation, and test sets (75%/15%/10%). On the independent test set, the baseline model achieved a mean absolute error of 3.07 kg, with 86.0% of examinations within ± 10% of reference weight. The extended model showed a slight improvement (mean absolute error, 2.83 kg; examinations within ± 10%, 88.8%). In scanner-wise cross-validation, mean absolute error ranged from 3.16 to 4.37 kg. Adult body weight can be estimated with practical accuracy using routinely available diagnostic CT dose-report information in a single-institution, multi-scanner setting.

Indexed as

Body WeightImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningRadiation DosageTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesBody weight estimationComputed tomographyDiagnostic reference levelsDose reportMachine learning

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.