MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408017725 · doi:10.2196/66622

Effectiveness of AI for Enhancing Computed Tomography Image Quality and Radiation Protection in Radiology: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4408017725 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S Zhang, Zhitao Zhu, Zhenfei Yu, Hai Gou Huang, Jinxin Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedical physicsComputed tomographyImage qualityMedicineRadiologyImage-guided radiation therapyRadiation therapyNuclear medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) presents a promising approach to balancing high image quality with reduced radiation exposure in computed tomography (CT) imaging. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of AI in enhancing CT image quality and lowering radiation doses. METHODS: A thorough literature search was performed across several databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library, with the final update in 2024. We included studies that compared AI-based interventions to conventional CT techniques. The quality of these studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effect models were used to pool results, and heterogeneity was measured using the I² statistic. Primary outcomes included image quality, CT dose index, and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: This meta-analysis incorporated 5 clinical validation studies published between 2022 and 2024, totaling 929 participants. Results indicated that AI-based interventions significantly improved image quality (mean difference 0.70, 95% CI 0.43-0.96; P<.001) and showed a positive trend in reducing the CT dose index, though not statistically significant (mean difference 0.47, 95% CI -0.21 to 1.15; P=.18). AI also enhanced image analysis efficiency (odds ratio 1.57, 95% CI 1.08-2.27; P=.02) and demonstrated high accuracy and sensitivity in detecting intracranial aneurysms, with low-dose CT using AI reconstruction showing noninferiority for liver lesion detection. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that AI-based interventions can significantly enhance CT imaging practices by improving image quality and potentially reducing radiation doses, which may lead to better diagnostic accuracy and patient safety. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies and the variability in AI algorithms. Further research is needed to clarify AI's impact on radiation reduction and to establish clinical standards.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.039
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.146
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207