Antiscatter grid use in pediatric digital tomosynthesis imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the effect of antiscatter grid use on tomosynthesis image quality. We performed an observer study that rated the image quality of digital tomosynthesis scout radiographs and slice images of a Leeds TO.20 contrast-detail test object embedded in acrylic with and without a grid. We considered 10, 15, 20 and 25 cm of acrylic to represent the wide range of patient thicknesses encountered in pediatric imaging. We also acquired and rated images without a grid at an increased patient dose. The readers counted the total number of visible details in each image as a measure of relative image quality. We observed that the antiscatter grid improves tomosynthesis image quality compared to the grid-out case, which received image quality scores similar to grid-in radiography. Our results suggest that, in order to achieve the best image quality in exchange for the increase in patient dose, it may often be appropriate to include an antiscatter grid for pediatric tomosynthesis imaging, particularly if the patient thickness is greater than 10 cm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".