271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33444367)
1. A comprehensive assessment of physical image quality of five different scanners for head CT imaging as clinically used at a single hospital centre-A phantom study.
Barca P; Paolicchi F; Aringhieri G; Palmas F; Marfisi D; Fantacci ME; Caramella D; Giannelli M
PLoS One; 2021; 16(1):e0245374. PubMed ID: 33444367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. CT head-scan dosimetry in an anthropomorphic phantom and associated measurement of ACR accreditation-phantom imaging metrics under clinically representative scan conditions.
Brunner CC; Stern SH; Minniti R; Parry MI; Skopec M; Chakrabarti K
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081917. PubMed ID: 23927331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Validation of synthesized normal-resolution image data generated from high-resolution acquisitions on a commercial CT scanner.
Hernandez AM; Shin DW; Abbey CK; Seibert JA; Akino N; Goto T; Vaishnav JY; Boedeker KL; Boone JM
Med Phys; 2020 Oct; 47(10):4775-4785. PubMed ID: 32677085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A systematic task-based image quality assessment of photon-counting and energy integrating CT as a function of reconstruction kernel and phantom size.
Bhattarai M; Bache S; Abadi E; Samei E
Med Phys; 2024 Feb; 51(2):1047-1060. PubMed ID: 37469179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Image quality of conventional images of dual-layer SPECTRAL CT: A phantom study.
van Ommen F; Bennink E; Vlassenbroek A; Dankbaar JW; Schilham AMR; Viergever MA; de Jong HWAM
Med Phys; 2018 Jul; 45(7):3031-3042. PubMed ID: 29749624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Technical assessment of a mobile CT scanner for image-guided brachytherapy.
Chernavsky NE; Morcos M; Wu P; Viswanathan AN; Siewerdsen JH
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Oct; 20(10):187-200. PubMed ID: 31578811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of tube focal spot size and acquisition mode on task-based image quality performance of a GE revolution HD dual energy CT scanner.
Papadakis AE; Damilakis J
Phys Med; 2021 Jun; 86():75-81. PubMed ID: 34062336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quantification and homogenization of image noise between two CT scanner models.
Einstein SA; Rong XJ; Jensen CT; Liu X
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Jan; 21(1):174-178. PubMed ID: 31859454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Quantitation of clinical feedback on image quality differences between two CT scanner models.
Bache ST; Stauduhar PJ; Liu X; Loyer EM; John RX
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 18(2):163-169. PubMed ID: 28300384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Harmonization of technical image quality in computed tomography: comparison between different reconstruction algorithms and kernels from six scanners.
Juntunen MAK; Rautiainen J; Hänninen NE; Kotiaho AO
Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2022 Apr; 8(3):. PubMed ID: 35320794
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Objective comparison of high-contrast spatial resolution and low-contrast detectability for various clinical protocols on multiple CT scanners.
Racine D; Viry A; Becce F; Schmidt S; Ba A; Bochud FO; Edyvean S; Schegerer A; Verdun FR
Med Phys; 2017 Sep; 44(9):e153-e163. PubMed ID: 28901621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A phantom study comparing low-dose CT physical image quality from five different CT scanners.
Li Y; Jiang Y; Liu H; Yu X; Chen S; Ma D; Gao J; Wu Y
Quant Imaging Med Surg; 2022 Jan; 12(1):766-780. PubMed ID: 34993117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A cross-platform survey of CT image quality and dose from routine abdomen protocols and a method to systematically standardize image quality.
Favazza CP; Duan X; Zhang Y; Yu L; Leng S; Kofler JM; Bruesewitz MR; McCollough CH
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Nov; 60(21):8381-97. PubMed ID: 26459751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Multicentric characterization of organ-based tube current modulation in head computed tomography: A dosimetric and image quality study.
Pondard S; Desport C; Munier M; Kien N; Rousseau H; Merignac O; Popotte C; Moreno R
Phys Med; 2024 Jun; 122():103389. PubMed ID: 38820806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Can different Catphan phantoms be used in a multi-centre audit of radiotherapy CT image quality?
Davis AT; Palmer AL; Nisbet A
Phys Med; 2020 Oct; 78():38-47. PubMed ID: 32942195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Characteristic image quality of a third generation dual-source MDCT scanner: Noise, resolution, and detectability.
Solomon J; Wilson J; Samei E
Med Phys; 2015 Aug; 42(8):4941-53. PubMed ID: 26233220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Technical assessment of a cone-beam CT scanner for otolaryngology imaging: image quality, dose, and technique protocols.
Xu J; Reh DD; Carey JP; Mahesh M; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):4932-42. PubMed ID: 22894419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Size-specific optimization of CT protocols based on minimum detectability.
Zhang Y; Smitherman C; Samei E
Med Phys; 2017 Apr; 44(4):1301-1311. PubMed ID: 28122119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of the variation in CT scanner performance (image quality and Hounsfield units) with scan parameters, for image optimisation in radiotherapy treatment planning.
Davis AT; Palmer AL; Pani S; Nisbet A
Phys Med; 2018 Jan; 45():59-64. PubMed ID: 29472091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Performance evaluation of a micro-CT system for laboratory animal imaging with iterative reconstruction capabilities.
Muller FM; Vanhove C; Vandeghinste B; Vandenberghe S
Med Phys; 2022 May; 49(5):3121-3133. PubMed ID: 35170057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
