Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging uses two types of image reconstruction. methods, i.e., filtered back projection (FBP) method and an iterative reconstruction (IR) method. Although the effect of the difference in the image reconstruction method on the image quality has been reported, these studies were performed using different apparatus or conditions. In this study, we examined the effect of image reconstruction on the image quality using the same equipment under the same conditions.
Method: We measured reflection artifact, sharpness, signal detection ability, and granularity using DBT-photographed images by both the FBP and the IR methods.
Result: Although the difference between the two methods was subtle for granularity, IR was found to be superior to FBP in all items tested.
Conclusion: This study suggested the clinical usefulness of IR over FBP.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.2021_JSRT_77.1.14 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!