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.
139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35808971)
1. Automated development of the contrast-detail curve based on statistical low-contrast detectability in CT images. Anam C; Naufal A; Fujibuchi T; Matsubara K; Dougherty G J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2022 Sep; 23(9):e13719. PubMed ID: 35808971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A novel method for developing contrast-detail curves from clinical patient images based on statistical low-contrast detectability. Anam C; Naufal A; Sutanto H; Fujibuchi T; Dougherty G Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2024 May; 10(4):. PubMed ID: 38744255 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Rapid measurement of the low contrast detectability of CT scanners. Omigbodun A; Vaishnav JY; Hsieh SS Med Phys; 2021 Mar; 48(3):1054-1063. PubMed ID: 33325033 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Accurate and efficient measurement of channelized Hotelling observer-based low-contrast detectability on the ACR CT accreditation phantom. Fan M; Thayib T; McCollough C; Yu L Med Phys; 2023 Feb; 50(2):737-749. PubMed ID: 36273393 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Consistent low-contrast detectability for variable patient sizes and corresponding dose in abdominal CT. Zhou Y; Nute J; Scott A; Lee C Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 44(3):861-872. PubMed ID: 28039857 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Automated assessment of low contrast sensitivity for CT systems using a model observer. Hernandez-Giron I; Geleijns J; Calzado A; Veldkamp WJ Med Phys; 2011 Jul; 38 Suppl 1():S25. PubMed ID: 21978115 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Channelized hotelling observer-based low-contrast detectability on the ACR CT accreditation phantom: Part II. Repeatability study. Fan M; Zhou Z; McCollough C; Yu L Med Phys; 2024 Mar; 51(3):1714-1725. PubMed ID: 38305692 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. On the relationship of minimum detectable contrast to dose and lesion size in abdominal CT. Zhou Y; Scott A; Allahverdian J; Lee C; Kightlinger B; Azizyan A; Miller J Phys Med Biol; 2015 Oct; 60(19):7671-94. PubMed ID: 26389637 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Deep Learning Reconstruction at CT: Phantom Study of the Image Characteristics. Higaki T; Nakamura Y; Zhou J; Yu Z; Nemoto T; Tatsugami F; Awai K Acad Radiol; 2020 Jan; 27(1):82-87. PubMed ID: 31818389 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Dose and blending fraction quantification for adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction based on low-contrast detectability in abdomen CT. Zhou Y J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Feb; 21(2):128-135. PubMed ID: 31898865 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Improving Low-contrast Detectability and Noise Texture Pattern for Computed Tomography Using Iterative Reconstruction Accelerated with Machine Learning Method: A Phantom Study. Funama Y; Takahashi H; Goto T; Aoki Y; Yoshida R; Kumagai Y; Awai K Acad Radiol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):929-936. PubMed ID: 31918961 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of low-contrast detectability between two CT reconstruction algorithms using voxel-based 3D printed textured phantoms. Solomon J; Ba A; Bochud F; Samei E Med Phys; 2016 Dec; 43(12):6497. PubMed ID: 27908164 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]