Eva J I Hoeijmakers, Bibi Martens, Joachim E Wildberger, Thomas G Flohr, Cécile R L P N Jeukens
{"title":"CT扫描诊断图像质量的客观评估:放射科医生和研究人员需要知道的。","authors":"Eva J I Hoeijmakers, Bibi Martens, Joachim E Wildberger, Thomas G Flohr, Cécile R L P N Jeukens","doi":"10.1186/s13244-025-02037-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Quantifying diagnostic image quality (IQ) is not straightforward but essential for optimizing the balance between IQ and radiation dose, and for ensuring consistent high-quality images in CT imaging. This review provides a comprehensive overview of advanced objective reference-free IQ assessment methods for CT scans, beyond standard approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science up to June 2024 to identify studies using advanced objective image quality methods on clinical CT scans. Only reference-free methods, which do not require a predefined reference image, were included. Traditional methods relying on the standard deviation of the Hounsfield units, the signal-to-noise ratio or contrast-to-noise ratio, all within a manually selected region-of-interest, were excluded. Eligible results were categorized by IQ metric (i.e., noise, contrast, spatial resolution and other) and assessment method (manual, automated, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-five studies were included that proposed or employed reference-free IQ methods, identifying 12 noise assessment methods, 4 contrast assessment methods, 14 spatial resolution assessment methods and 7 others, based on manual, automated or AI-based approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review emphasizes the transition from manual to fully automated approaches for IQ assessment, including the potential of AI-based methods, and it provides a reference tool for researchers and radiologists who need to make a well-considered choice in how to evaluate IQ in CT imaging.</p><p><strong>Critical relevance statement: </strong>This review examines the challenge of quantifying diagnostic CT image quality, essential for optimization studies and ensuring consistent high-quality images, by providing an overview of objective reference-free diagnostic image quality assessment methods beyond standard methods.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Quantifying diagnostic CT image quality remains a key challenge. This review summarizes objective diagnostic image quality assessment techniques beyond standard metrics. A decision tree is provided to help select optimal image quality assessment techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":13639,"journal":{"name":"Insights into Imaging","volume":"16 1","pages":"154"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12246289/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Objective assessment of diagnostic image quality in CT scans: what radiologists and researchers need to know.\",\"authors\":\"Eva J I Hoeijmakers, Bibi Martens, Joachim E Wildberger, Thomas G Flohr, Cécile R L P N Jeukens\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13244-025-02037-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Quantifying diagnostic image quality (IQ) is not straightforward but essential for optimizing the balance between IQ and radiation dose, and for ensuring consistent high-quality images in CT imaging. This review provides a comprehensive overview of advanced objective reference-free IQ assessment methods for CT scans, beyond standard approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science up to June 2024 to identify studies using advanced objective image quality methods on clinical CT scans. Only reference-free methods, which do not require a predefined reference image, were included. Traditional methods relying on the standard deviation of the Hounsfield units, the signal-to-noise ratio or contrast-to-noise ratio, all within a manually selected region-of-interest, were excluded. Eligible results were categorized by IQ metric (i.e., noise, contrast, spatial resolution and other) and assessment method (manual, automated, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-five studies were included that proposed or employed reference-free IQ methods, identifying 12 noise assessment methods, 4 contrast assessment methods, 14 spatial resolution assessment methods and 7 others, based on manual, automated or AI-based approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review emphasizes the transition from manual to fully automated approaches for IQ assessment, including the potential of AI-based methods, and it provides a reference tool for researchers and radiologists who need to make a well-considered choice in how to evaluate IQ in CT imaging.</p><p><strong>Critical relevance statement: </strong>This review examines the challenge of quantifying diagnostic CT image quality, essential for optimization studies and ensuring consistent high-quality images, by providing an overview of objective reference-free diagnostic image quality assessment methods beyond standard methods.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Quantifying diagnostic CT image quality remains a key challenge. This review summarizes objective diagnostic image quality assessment techniques beyond standard metrics. A decision tree is provided to help select optimal image quality assessment techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Insights into Imaging\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"154\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12246289/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Insights into Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-02037-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insights into Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-02037-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:定量诊断图像质量(IQ)并不简单,但对于优化IQ和辐射剂量之间的平衡,以及确保CT成像中一致的高质量图像至关重要。这篇综述提供了先进的客观无参考的智商评估方法的全面概述,为CT扫描,超越标准方法。方法:检索PubMed和Web of Science截至2024年6月的文献,以确定在临床CT扫描中使用先进客观图像质量方法的研究。只包括不需要预定义参考图像的无参考方法。传统的方法依赖于Hounsfield单位的标准差、信噪比或对比噪声比,这些方法都在人工选择的兴趣区域内被排除在外。根据IQ指标(即噪音、对比度、空间分辨率等)和评估方法(手动、自动化和基于人工智能(AI))对合格结果进行分类。结果:共纳入35项提出或采用无参考IQ方法的研究,确定了基于人工、自动化或人工智能方法的12种噪声评估方法、4种对比度评估方法、14种空间分辨率评估方法和7种其他方法。结论:本综述强调了IQ评估方法从手动到全自动的转变,包括基于人工智能的方法的潜力,为需要在如何评估CT成像中的IQ时做出明智选择的研究人员和放射科医生提供了参考工具。关键相关性声明:本综述通过提供超越标准方法的客观无参考诊断图像质量评估方法的概述,研究了量化诊断CT图像质量的挑战,这对于优化研究和确保一致的高质量图像至关重要。诊断CT图像质量的量化仍然是一个关键的挑战。本文综述了超越标准度量的客观诊断图像质量评价技术。提供了一个决策树来帮助选择最佳的图像质量评估技术。
Objective assessment of diagnostic image quality in CT scans: what radiologists and researchers need to know.
Objectives: Quantifying diagnostic image quality (IQ) is not straightforward but essential for optimizing the balance between IQ and radiation dose, and for ensuring consistent high-quality images in CT imaging. This review provides a comprehensive overview of advanced objective reference-free IQ assessment methods for CT scans, beyond standard approaches.
Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science up to June 2024 to identify studies using advanced objective image quality methods on clinical CT scans. Only reference-free methods, which do not require a predefined reference image, were included. Traditional methods relying on the standard deviation of the Hounsfield units, the signal-to-noise ratio or contrast-to-noise ratio, all within a manually selected region-of-interest, were excluded. Eligible results were categorized by IQ metric (i.e., noise, contrast, spatial resolution and other) and assessment method (manual, automated, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based).
Results: Thirty-five studies were included that proposed or employed reference-free IQ methods, identifying 12 noise assessment methods, 4 contrast assessment methods, 14 spatial resolution assessment methods and 7 others, based on manual, automated or AI-based approaches.
Conclusion: This review emphasizes the transition from manual to fully automated approaches for IQ assessment, including the potential of AI-based methods, and it provides a reference tool for researchers and radiologists who need to make a well-considered choice in how to evaluate IQ in CT imaging.
Critical relevance statement: This review examines the challenge of quantifying diagnostic CT image quality, essential for optimization studies and ensuring consistent high-quality images, by providing an overview of objective reference-free diagnostic image quality assessment methods beyond standard methods.
Key points: Quantifying diagnostic CT image quality remains a key challenge. This review summarizes objective diagnostic image quality assessment techniques beyond standard metrics. A decision tree is provided to help select optimal image quality assessment techniques.
期刊介绍:
Insights into Imaging (I³) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. All content published in the journal is freely available online to anyone, anywhere!
I³ continuously updates scientific knowledge and progress in best-practice standards in radiology through the publication of original articles and state-of-the-art reviews and opinions, along with recommendations and statements from the leading radiological societies in Europe.
Founded by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), I³ creates a platform for educational material, guidelines and recommendations, and a forum for topics of controversy.
A balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes I³ an indispensable source for current information in this field.
I³ is owned by the ESR, however authors retain copyright to their article according to the Creative Commons Attribution License (see Copyright and License Agreement). All articles can be read, redistributed and reused for free, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
The open access fees (article-processing charges) for this journal are kindly sponsored by ESR for all Members.
The journal went open access in 2012, which means that all articles published since then are freely available online.