These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34287936)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Ultra-low peak voltage CT colonography: effect of iterative reconstruction algorithms on performance of radiologists who use anthropomorphic colonic phantoms. Shin CI; Kim SH; Lee ES; Lee DH; Hwang EJ; Chung SY; Lee JM; Han JK; Choi BI Radiology; 2014 Dec; 273(3):759-71. PubMed ID: 25010640 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Noise power spectrum properties of deep learning-based reconstruction and iterative reconstruction algorithms: Phantom and clinical study. Funama Y; Nakaura T; Hasegawa A; Sakabe D; Oda S; Kidoh M; Nagayama Y; Hirai T Eur J Radiol; 2023 Aug; 165():110914. PubMed ID: 37295358 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. New adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction ASiR-V: Assessment of noise performance in comparison to ASiR. De Marco P; Origgi D J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 Mar; 19(2):275-286. PubMed ID: 29363260 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Initial phantom study comparing image quality in computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and new adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction v. Lim K; Kwon H; Cho J; Oh J; Yoon S; Kang M; Ha D; Lee J; Kang E J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2015; 39(3):443-8. PubMed ID: 25654782 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Computed tomography radiation dose reduction: effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on image quality. Willemink MJ; Takx RA; de Jong PA; Budde RP; Bleys RL; Das M; Wildberger JE; Prokop M; Buls N; de Mey J; Leiner T; Schilham AM J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2014; 38(6):815-23. PubMed ID: 24983438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. [A Study of 3D-NPS Analysis in CT Images Based on the Central Cross-section Theorem]. Narita A; Ohkubo M; Fukaya T; Sakai K; Noto Y Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2022 Apr; 78(4):342-347. PubMed ID: 35228483 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Application of fractal dimension for quantifying noise texture in computed tomography images. Khobragade P; Fan J; Rupcich F; Crotty DJ; Schmidt TG Med Phys; 2018 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 29885062 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Quantitative Image Quality and Histogram-Based Evaluations of an Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm at Low-to-Ultralow Radiation Dose Levels: A Phantom Study in Chest CT. Lee KB; Goo HW Korean J Radiol; 2018; 19(1):119-129. PubMed ID: 29354008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Reducing CT radiation dose with iterative reconstruction algorithms: the influence of scan and reconstruction parameters on image quality and CTDIvol. Klink T; Obmann V; Heverhagen J; Stork A; Adam G; Begemann P Eur J Radiol; 2014 Sep; 83(9):1645-54. PubMed ID: 25037931 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Full Dose-Reduction Potential of Statistical Iterative Reconstruction for Head CT Protocols in a Predominantly Pediatric Population. Mirro AE; Brady SL; Kaufman RA AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 2016 Jul; 37(7):1199-205. PubMed ID: 27056425 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Spatial Distribution of Noise Reduction in Four Iterative Reconstruction Algorithms in CT-A Technical Evaluation. Guleng A; Bolstad K; Dalehaug I; Flatabø S; Aadnevik D; Pettersen HES Diagnostics (Basel); 2020 Aug; 10(9):. PubMed ID: 32872274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Image Quality Measured From Ultra-Low Dose Chest Computed Tomography Examination Protocols Using 6 Different Iterative Reconstructions From 4 Vendors, a Phantom Study. Afadzi M; Fosså K; Andersen HK; Aaløkken TM; Martinsen ACT J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2020; 44(1):95-101. PubMed ID: 31939889 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Technical Note: Evaluation of a 160-mm/256-row CT scanner for whole-heart quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging. So A; Imai Y; Nett B; Jackson J; Nett L; Hsieh J; Wisenberg G; Teefy P; Yadegari A; Islam A; Lee TY Med Phys; 2016 Aug; 43(8):4821. PubMed ID: 27487900 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Objective performance assessment of five computed tomography iterative reconstruction algorithms. Omotayo A; Elbakri I J Xray Sci Technol; 2016 Nov; 24(6):913-930. PubMed ID: 27612054 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. CT automated exposure control using a generalized detectability index. Khobragade P; Rupcich F; Fan J; Crotty DJ; Kulkarni NM; O'Connor SD; Foley WD; Schmidt TG Med Phys; 2019 Jan; 46(1):140-151. PubMed ID: 30417403 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of noise-magnitude and noise-texture across two generations of iterative reconstruction algorithms from three manufacturers. Greffier J; Larbi A; Frandon J; Moliner G; Beregi JP; Pereira F Diagn Interv Imaging; 2019; 100(7-8):401-410. PubMed ID: 31130375 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Noise assessment across two generations of iterative reconstruction algorithms of three manufacturers using bone reconstruction kernel. Greffier J; Frandon J; Larbi A; Om D; Beregi JP; Pereira F Diagn Interv Imaging; 2019 Dec; 100(12):763-770. PubMed ID: 31473164 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]