The use of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR) technique in evaluation of patients with cervical spine trauma: impact on radiation dose reduction and image quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR) technique on the image quality and radiation dose reduction. The comparison was made with the traditional filtered back projection (FBP) technique. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 78 patients, who underwent cervical spine CT for blunt cervical trauma between 1 June 2010 and 30 November 2010. 48 patients were imaged using traditional FBP technique and the remaining 30 patients were imaged using the ASiR technique. The patient demographics, radiation dose, objective image signal and noise were recorded; while subjective noise, sharpness, diagnostic acceptability and artefacts were graded by two radiologists blinded to the techniques. RESULTS: We found that the ASiR technique was able to reduce the volume CT dose index, dose-length product and effective dose by 36%, 36.5% and 36.5%, respectively, compared with the FBP technique. There was no significant difference in the image noise (p = 0.39), signal (p = 0.82) and signal-to-noise ratio (p = 0.56) between the groups. The subjective image quality was minimally better in the ASiR group but not statistically significant. There was excellent interobserver agreement on the subjective image quality and diagnostic acceptability for both groups. CONCLUSION: The use of ASiR technique allowed approximately 36% radiation dose reduction in the evaluation of cervical spine without degrading the image quality. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The present study highlights that the ASiR technique is extremely helpful in reducing the patient radiation exposure while maintaining the image quality. It is highly recommended to utilize this novel technique in CT imaging of different body regions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".