| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Ihlis, R. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Image quality assessment of low-dose protocols in cone beam computed tomography of the anterior maxilla
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology. - : Elsevier. - 2212-4403 .- 2212-4411. ; 133:4, s. 483-491
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives. To evaluate overall image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on low-dose cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and the effect of a noise reduction filter for assessment of the anterior maxilla. Methods. We obtained 48 CBCT volumes on 8 skull-phantoms using 6 protocols: 2 clinical default protocols [standard definition (SD) and high definition (HD)] and 4 low-dose protocols, 2 with a noise reduction filter [ultra-low-dose with high definition (ULDHD) and ultra-low-dose (ULD)] and 2 without [low-dose with high definition (LDHD) and low-dose (LD)]. Overall image quality and visibility of 8 anatomic structures were assessed by 5 observers and statistically analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Intra- and interobserver agreement was measured using Cohen's weighted kappa. Results. HD provided higher overall image quality than diagnostically required; LD scored lower than diagnostically acceptable. ULDHD, ULD, and LDHD were acceptable. For anatomic structures, ULDHD and ULD were acceptable. LDHD and LD showed significantly inferior visibility for 1 and 4 structures, respectively. Mean values of intra- and interobserver agreement were 0.395 to 0.547 and 0.350 to 0.370, respectively. Conclusions. ULDHD, ULD, and LDHD may be recommended for assessment of impacted maxillary canines. The noise reduction filter affects image quality positively only at low exposure.
|
|
| 10. |
- Imran, Mahrukh, et al.
(författare)
-
Methods and results used in the development of a consensus-driven extension to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement for trials conducted using cohorts and routinely collected data (CONSORT-ROUTINE)
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 11:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: Randomised controlled trials conducted using cohorts and routinely collected data, including registries, electronic health records and administrative databases, are increasingly used in healthcare intervention research. A Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement extension for trials conducted using cohorts and routinely collected data (CONSORT-ROUTINE) has been developed with the goal of improving reporting quality. This article describes the processes and methods used to develop the extension and decisions made to arrive at the final checklist.METHODS: The development process involved five stages: (1) identification of the need for a reporting guideline and project launch; (2) conduct of a scoping review to identify possible modifications to CONSORT 2010 checklist items and possible new extension items; (3) a three-round modified Delphi study involving key stakeholders to gather feedback on the checklist; (4) a consensus meeting to finalise items to be included in the extension, followed by stakeholder piloting of the checklist; and (5) publication, dissemination and implementation of the final checklist.RESULTS: 27 items were initially developed and rated in Delphi round 1, 13 items were rated in round 2 and 11 items were rated in round 3. Response rates for the Delphi study were 92 of 125 (74%) invited participants in round 1, 77 of 92 (84%) round 1 completers in round 2 and 62 of 77 (81%) round 2 completers in round 3. Twenty-seven members of the project team representing a variety of stakeholder groups attended the in-person consensus meeting. The final checklist includes five new items and eight modified items. The extension Explanation & Elaboration document further clarifies aspects that are important to report.CONCLUSION: Uptake of CONSORT-ROUTINE and accompanying Explanation & Elaboration document will improve conduct of trials, as well as the transparency and completeness of reporting of trials conducted using cohorts and routinely collected data.
|
|
