Literature DB >> 14564469

Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography.

Patrik Sund1, Magnus Båth, Susanne Kheddache, Lars Gunnar Månsson.   

Abstract

A study was conducted to compare physical and clinical system performance in digital chest radiography. Four digital X-ray modalities, two storage-phosphor based systems and two generations of a CCD-based system, were evaluated in terms of both their imaging properties (determination of presampling MTF and DQE) and clinical image quality (grading of the reproduction of anatomical details of 23 healthy volunteers using both absolute and relative visual grading analysis). One of the two storage-phosphor systems performed best in both evaluations and the first generation of the CCD-based system was rated worst; however, the other two systems were ranked differently with the two methods. The newest CCD-based system yielded a higher clinical image quality than the second storage-phosphor system, although the latter presented a DQE substantially higher than the former. The results show that clinical performance cannot be predicted from determinations of DQE alone, and that a system with lower DQE, under the quantum-saturated conditions in chest radiography, can outperform a system with higher DQE if the image processing used on the former is more effective in presenting the information in the image to the radiologist.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14564469     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-003-1971-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  20 in total

1.  Self-normalizing method to measure the detective quantum efficiency of a wide range of x-ray detectors.

Authors:  K Stierstorfer; M Spahn
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Estimation of the noisy component of anatomical backgrounds.

Authors:  F O Bochud; J F Valley; F R Verdun; C Hessler; P Schnyder
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  The influence of different technique factors on image quality of lumbar spine radiographs as evaluated by established CEC image criteria.

Authors:  A Almén; A Tingberg; S Mattsson; J Besjakov; S Kheddache; B Lanhede; L G Månsson; M Zankl
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  An experimental comparison of detector performance for computed radiography systems.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Michael J Flynn
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  An assessment of the usefulness of screen-film speed classifications.

Authors:  P C Brennan; S A Devereux
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2001-11-17       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Evaluation of the imaging properties of two generations of a CCD-based system for digital chest radiography.

Authors:  Magnus Båth; Patrik Sund; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography.

Authors:  H Fujita; D Y Tsai; T Itoh; K Doi; J Morishita; K Ueda; A Ohtsuka
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 10.048

8.  The influence of different technique factors on image quality of chest radiographs as evaluated by modified CEC image quality criteria.

Authors:  B Lanhede; M Båth; S Kheddache; P Sund; L Björneld; M Widell; A Almén; J Besjakov; S Mattsson; A Tingberg; C Herrmann; W Panzer; M Zankl; L G Månsson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Effects of undersampling on the proper interpretation of modulation transfer function, noise power spectra, and noise equivalent quanta of digital imaging systems.

Authors:  J T Dobbins
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  DQE(f) of four generations of computed radiography acquisition devices.

Authors:  J T Dobbins; D L Ergun; L Rutz; D A Hinshaw; H Blume; D C Clark
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  27 in total

1.  A method to produce and validate a digitally reconstructed radiograph-based computer simulation for optimisation of chest radiographs acquired with a computed radiography imaging system.

Authors:  C S Moore; G P Liney; A W Beavis; J R Saunderson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Digital radiography: optimization of image quality and dose using multi-frequency software.

Authors:  H Precht; O Gerke; K Rosendahl; A Tingberg; D Waaler
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-04-17

3.  The influence of liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors on observer performance for the detection of nodular lesions on chest radiographs.

Authors:  H Usami; M Ikeda; T Ishigaki; H Fukushima; K Shimamoto
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-11-12       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  A clinical evaluation of the image quality computer program, CoCIQ.

Authors:  E Norrman; M Gårdestig; J Persliden; H Geijer
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Contrast-detail evaluation and dose assessment of eight digital chest radiography systems in clinical practice.

Authors:  Wouter J H Veldkamp; Lucia J M Kroft; Mireille V Boot; Bart J A Mertens; Jacob Geleijns
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-08-31       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Should 3K zoom function be used for detection of pneumothorax in cesium iodide/amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiographs presented on 1K-matrix soft copies?

Authors:  Karin A Herrmann; H M Bonél; A Stäbler; M Voelk; M Strotzer; C J Zech; M F Reiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Direct detector radiography versus dual reading computed radiography: feasibility of dose reduction in chest radiography.

Authors:  Michael Gruber; Martin Uffmann; Michael Weber; Mathias Prokop; Csilla Balassy; Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-01-11       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  New developed DR detector performs radiographs of hand, pelvic and premature chest anatomies at a lower radiation dose and/or a higher image quality.

Authors:  Helle Precht; Anders Tingberg; Dag Waaler; Claus Bjørn Outzen
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography part 2: initial results in dose reduction and image quality.

Authors:  Martin J Willemink; Tim Leiner; Pim A de Jong; Linda M de Heer; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Arnold M R Schilham; Ricardo P J Budde
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Comparison of visual grading and free-response ROC analyses for assessment of image-processing algorithms in digital mammography.

Authors:  F Zanca; C Van Ongeval; F Claus; J Jacobs; R Oyen; H Bosmans
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.