Variability of the discrepancy between manufacturer and measured CTDI 100 values by scanner type, acquisition parameters and phantom size

Standardization of mineral density maps of physiologic and pathologic biominerals in humans using cone-beam CT and micro-CT scanners

“…The primary effectors for the observed overlap may be the use of different scanners (Fig. 3), and the lack of a calibrated X-ray imaging protocol in vivo [6,7,14]. Regardless of these limitations, macro-trends such as clustering of cortical and trabecular bone into higher and lower MD ranges, respectively, were observed (Fig.…”

“…Radiographic imaging in medicine and dentistry provides clinicians with a visual representation of anatomy with limited to no information on the pathophysiology of associated diseases [3][4][5]. Different X-ray technologies have contributed to a routine use of non-standardized imaging protocols on patients [6,7]. Partly for this reason, the reliable detection of initial disease states using non-invasive imaging with the goal of prevention or early treatment remains a challenge.…”

Average glandular doses reported by mammography units: how reliable are they?

“…In computed tomography, it is expected that there will be agreement between measured and displayed computed tomography dose index (CTDI) within ±20% [21]. Discrepancies higher than 20% are occasionally observed, especially for low kV values [23]. Besides, the definition of CTDI has changed over time, and different CT models may use different definitions [24].…”