1. European Journal of Radiology
Current CT practice in Germany: Results and implications of a nationwide survey 
Alexander A. Schegerer, Hans-Dieter Nagel, Georg Stamm, Gerhard Adam, Gunnar Brix 
European Journal of Radiology 
Volume 90, Pages (May 2017)
DOI: /j.ejrad
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Total number of CT scanners considered in the survey. For each of the four large manufacturers presented on the German market, data are stratified to scanners with a different number of detector rows.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
Number of CT examinations performed per scanner and year in practices, non-academic hospitals, and university hospitals.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

4. Fig. 3
Box and whisker plots of (a) CTDIvol, (b) L, (c) DLP, and (d) Deff for the 34 CT standard examination defined in Table 1. The boxes are drawn around the 25th and 75th percentiles and divided by the 50th percentile. The whiskers extend out to the 10th and 90th percentiles. Fig. 3(e) standard scan length (cf. Table 1) and mean realized scan length L computed from the ratio of DLP and CTDIvol. The examinations are sorted in ascending order of mean values.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

5. Fig. 3
Box and whisker plots of (a) CTDIvol, (b) L, (c) DLP, and (d) Deff for the 34 CT standard examination defined in Table 1. The boxes are drawn around the 25th and 75th percentiles and divided by the 50th percentile. The whiskers extend out to the 10th and 90th percentiles. Fig. 3(e) standard scan length (cf. Table 1) and mean realized scan length L computed from the ratio of DLP and CTDIvol. The examinations are sorted in ascending order of mean values.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

6. Fig. 3
Box and whisker plots of (a) CTDIvol, (b) L, (c) DLP, and (d) Deff for the 34 CT standard examination defined in Table 1. The boxes are drawn around the 25th and 75th percentiles and divided by the 50th percentile. The whiskers extend out to the 10th and 90th percentiles. Fig. 3(e) standard scan length (cf. Table 1) and mean realized scan length L computed from the ratio of DLP and CTDIvol. The examinations are sorted in ascending order of mean values.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

7. Fig. 3
Box and whisker plots of (a) CTDIvol, (b) L, (c) DLP, and (d) Deff for the 34 CT standard examination defined in Table 1. The boxes are drawn around the 25th and 75th percentiles and divided by the 50th percentile. The whiskers extend out to the 10th and 90th percentiles. Fig. 3(e) standard scan length (cf. Table 1) and mean realized scan length L computed from the ratio of DLP and CTDIvol. The examinations are sorted in ascending order of mean values.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

8. Fig. 3
Box and whisker plots of (a) CTDIvol, (b) L, (c) DLP, and (d) Deff for the 34 CT standard examination defined in Table 1. The boxes are drawn around the 25th and 75th percentiles and divided by the 50th percentile. The whiskers extend out to the 10th and 90th percentiles. Fig. 3(e) standard scan length (cf. Table 1) and mean realized scan length L computed from the ratio of DLP and CTDIvol. The examinations are sorted in ascending order of mean values.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

9. Fig. 4
Effects of innovative CT scan and image reconstruction techniques on CTDIvol, L, and Deff, based on an evaluation of the corresponding normalized quantities Xˆm,k that can statistically be analyzed across the 34 standard CT examinations. (a) Spiral mode, (b) tube current modulation (TCM), and (c) iterative image reconstruction (IR; FBP: filtered-back projection). Data are given relative to the scan and reconstruction technique indicated in each plot by the dark gray bars.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

10. Fig. 4
Effects of innovative CT scan and image reconstruction techniques on CTDIvol, L, and Deff, based on an evaluation of the corresponding normalized quantities Xˆm,k that can statistically be analyzed across the 34 standard CT examinations. (a) Spiral mode, (b) tube current modulation (TCM), and (c) iterative image reconstruction (IR; FBP: filtered-back projection). Data are given relative to the scan and reconstruction technique indicated in each plot by the dark gray bars.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

11. Fig. 4
Effects of innovative CT scan and image reconstruction techniques on CTDIvol, L, and Deff, based on an evaluation of the corresponding normalized quantities Xˆm,k that can statistically be analyzed across the 34 standard CT examinations. (a) Spiral mode, (b) tube current modulation (TCM), and (c) iterative image reconstruction (IR; FBP: filtered-back projection). Data are given relative to the scan and reconstruction technique indicated in each plot by the dark gray bars.
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

12. Fig. 5
Mean CTDIvol, L and Deff values evaluated for CT scanners produced by four different manufacturers based on an evaluation of the corresponding normalized quantities Xˆm,k that can statistically be analyzed across the 34 standard CT examinations. Data are given relative to data for manufacturer A for examinations performed (a) without and (b) with TCM (for manufacturer D, data are not presented due to the reason given in the text).
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions

13. Fig. 5
Mean CTDIvol, L and Deff values evaluated for CT scanners produced by four different manufacturers based on an evaluation of the corresponding normalized quantities Xˆm,k that can statistically be analyzed across the 34 standard CT examinations. Data are given relative to data for manufacturer A for examinations performed (a) without and (b) with TCM (for manufacturer D, data are not presented due to the reason given in the text).
European Journal of Radiology  , DOI: ( /j.ejrad )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. Terms and Conditions