Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Bogaerts, Ria

  • Google
  • 1
  • 6
  • 192

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2013Quantification of metal artifacts on cone beam computed tomography images192citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Stamatakis, Harry
1 / 1 shared
Bosmans, Hilde
1 / 3 shared
Horner, Keith
1 / 2 shared
Tsiklakis, Kostas
1 / 1 shared
Pauwels, Ruben
1 / 1 shared
Jacobs, Reinhilde
1 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2013

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Stamatakis, Harry
  • Bosmans, Hilde
  • Horner, Keith
  • Tsiklakis, Kostas
  • Pauwels, Ruben
  • Jacobs, Reinhilde
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Quantification of metal artifacts on cone beam computed tomography images

  • Bogaerts, Ria
  • Stamatakis, Harry
  • Bosmans, Hilde
  • Horner, Keith
  • Tsiklakis, Kostas
  • Pauwels, Ruben
  • Jacobs, Reinhilde
Abstract

<p>Objectives: To quantify metal artifacts obtained from a wide range of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices and exposure protocols, to compare their tolerance to metals of different densities, and to provide insights regarding the possible implementation of metal artifact analysis into a QC protocol for CBCT. Materials and methods: A customized polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) phantom, containing titanium and lead rods, was fabricated. It was scanned on 13 CBCT devices and one multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) device, including high-dose and low-dose exposure protocols. Artifacts from the rods were assessed by two observers by measuring the standard deviation of voxel values in the vicinity of the rods, and normalizing this value to the percentage of the theoretical maximum standard deviation. Results: For CBCT datasets, artifact values ranged between 6.1% and 27.4% for titanium, and between 10.% and 43.7% for lead. Most CBCT devices performed worse than MSCT for titanium artifacts, but all of them performed better for lead artifacts. In general, no clear improvement of metal artifacts was seen for high-dose protocols, although certain devices showed some artifact reduction for large FOV or high exposure protocols. Conclusions: Regions in the vicinity of the metal rods were moderately or gravely affected, particularly in the area between the rods. In practice, the CBCT user has very limited possibilities to reduce artifacts. Researchers and manufacturers need to combine their efforts in optimizing exposure factors and implementing metal artifact reduction algorithms.</p>

Topics
  • tomography
  • titanium
  • normalizing