Cited by 52Ultrasound in Clinical ApplicationsPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesUltrasound Imaging and Elastography

Influence of power Doppler gain setting on Virtual Organ Computer‐aided AnaLysis indices in vivo: can use of the individual sub‐noise gain level optimize information?

Collins, S. L., Stevenson, G. N., Noble, J. A., Impey, L., Welsh, A. W.·2012·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the influence of gain setting on the calculated Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis (VOCAL(™)) three-dimensional (3D) indices and define a point, the sub-noise gain (SNG), at which maximum information is available without noise artifact. METHODS: Pregnant women were recruited at the time of their pregnancy-dating scan. Five identical static 3D power Doppler volumes of the placenta were acquired using identical machine settings apart from altering the power Doppler gain setting. The gain settings included the individualized SNG setting (determined by increasing gain until noise artifact was visible, then reducing it until the artifact just disappeared). The data were analyzed using VOCAL II. Vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI) and vascularization flow index (VFI) were calculated for the same sample at five different power Doppler gain levels. The relationship between the values calculated for the VOCAL indices and the gain value was explored using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Results from 50 women were analyzed. The percentage difference in VI and VFI from that observed at the SNG level in each woman was significantly linearly related to the gain setting relative to that at the SNG point (VI: r(2) = 0.68, P < 0.0001; VFI: r(2) = 0.72, P < 0.0001), with the values produced for VI and VFI decreasing as the gain was turned down. There was a distinct 'turning point' at the SNG level with linear relationships above and below, but with significantly different gradients (P ≤ 0.001). This relationship was not demonstrated for FI. CONCLUSION: The SNG setting appears to represent each individual's optimum gain level. Using this may improve meaningful comparisons of VI and VFI between patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/uog.10122

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collins, S. L., Stevenson, G. N., Noble, J. A., Impey, L., & Welsh, A. W.
Affiliations
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Collins, S. L.
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-06-29
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
75-80
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
OpenAlex
W2060948205
Cited by
52
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Ultrasound in Clinical Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
Keywords
virtual organ computer-aided analysis, placental Doppler, vascularization index, flow index, vascularization flow index, noise artifacts
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Placenta, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Pulsatile Flow, Regional Blood Flow, Ultrasonography, Doppler, Phantoms, Imaging, Imaging, Three-Dimensional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review