Impact of Exposure Settings Variations on Contrast and Spatial Resolution in CMOS and Direct-Conversion CMOS Intraoral Sensors
Clicks: 2
ID: 323201
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
2 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #25 of 46 articles by views in dentomaxillofacial radiology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of exposure setting variations on contrast and spatial resolution (SR) in CMOS and direct-conversion CMOS (DC-CMOS) intraoral sensors. METHODS: Ten images of a DDQA phantom were acquired for each assessed condition using three sensors (CMOS-I, CMOS-S, DC-CMOS) and two X-ray units (HH: handheld; WM: wall-mounted). HH was set at 60kVp/2.5mA, and WM was set at 60kVp/7mA and 70kVp/7mA. Each combined sensor-x-ray unit condition was exposed at 0.02, 0.04, 0.05, 0.08, 0.10, 0.16, 0.20, 0.25, 0.32, 0.40, 0.50, 0.63, 0.80, and 1.00s. One observer selected 2 × 2 mm ROIs from the third and fifth steps of the DDQA step-wedge and measured their mean gray values using Fiji macro. Contrast was calculated by subtracting the mean gray value of the third step from the fifth step for each group. SR was determined by identifying the line pair with the highest value, in which five peaks and four valleys were distinguishable. Descriptive statistics were calculated for SR and three-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests for contrast (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Across all exposure parameters, CMOS-I exhibited the highest mean contrast, followed by DC-CMOS and CMOS-S (p < 0.001). HH yielded the highest mean contrast, which was significantly greater than WM (p < 0.001). CMOS-S exhibited the highest SR, and DC-CMOS the lowest, although SR remained constant for DC-CMOS across all exposure times. CONCLUSION: Sensor type, x-ray unit, and exposure time influenced image contrast and spatial resolution, while variations in kVp had minimal impact on these image quality parameters.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7172161568
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniela Pita de Melo, Luiz Eduardo Marinho-Vieira, Caroline Hoang, Crystal Ly, Ryan Kuhn, Jacqueline Tkachuk, Saulo L Sousa Melo |
| Journal | dentomaxillofacial radiology |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/dmfr/twag056
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.