ArticleNeuroradiology2024
Deep learning reconstruction for high-resolution computed tomography images of the temporal bone: comparison with hybrid iterative reconstruction.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Image-based deep learning in otology: a state-of-the-art review.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- Automated Task-Transfer Function Measurement for CT Image Quality Assessment Based on AAPM TG 233.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Audiology: A Scoping Review of Current Applications and Future Directions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe investigated whether the quality of high-resolution computed tomography (CT) images of the temporal bone improves with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR).
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled 36 patients (15 men, 21 women; age, 53.9 ± 19.5 years) who had undergone high-resolution CT of the temporal bone. Axial and coronal images were reconstructed using DLR, HIR, and filtered back projection (FBP). In qualitative image analyses, two radiologists independently compared the DLR and HIR images with FBP in terms of depiction of structures, image noise, and overall quality, using a 5-point scale (5 = better than FBP, 1 = poorer than FBP) to evaluate image quality. The other two radiologists placed regions of interest on the tympanic cavity and measured the standard deviation of CT attenuation (i.e., quantitative image noise). Scores from the qualitative and quantitative analyses of the DLR and HIR images were compared using, respectively, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the paired t-test.
resultsQualitative and quantitative image noise was significantly reduced in DLR images compared with HIR images (all comparisons, p ≤ 0.016). Depiction of the otic capsule, auditory ossicles, and tympanic membrane was significantly improved in DLR images compared with HIR images (both readers, p ≤ 0.003). Overall image quality was significantly superior in DLR images compared with HIR images (both readers, p < 0.001).
conclusionCompared with HIR, DLR provided significantly better-quality high-resolution CT images of the temporal bone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.