Literature DB >> 15645331

Comparison of human observer performance of contrast-detail detection across multiple liquid crystal displays.

Alice N Averbukh1, David S Channin, Prasobsook Homhual.   

Abstract

Appropriate selection of a display subsystem requires balancing the optimization of its physical parameters with clinical setting and cost. Recent advances in Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) technology warrant a rigorous evaluation of both the specialized and the mass market displays for clinical radiology. This article outlines step two in the evaluation of a novel 9.2 million pixel IBM AMLCD panel. Prior to these experiments, the panel was calibrated according to the DICOM Part 14 standard, using both a gray-scale and a pseudo-gray scale lookup table. The specific aim of this study is to compare human, contrast-detail perception on different computer display subsystems. The subsystems that we looked at included 3- and 5-million pixel "medical-grade" monochrome LCDs and a 9.2-million pixel color LCD. We found that the observer response was similar for these three display configurations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15645331      PMCID: PMC3047211          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-004-1035-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  7 in total

1.  ROC curve analysis of lesion detectability on phantoms: comparison of digital spot mammography with conventional spot mammography.

Authors:  W M Yip; S Y Pang; W S Yim; C S Kwok
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Interpretation of digital mammograms: comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Elodia B Cole; Emily O Kistner; Keith E Muller; Bradley M Hemminger; Mary L Brown; R Eugene Johnston; Cherie M Kuzmiak; M Patricia Braeuning; Rita I Freimanis; Mary Scott Soo; J A Baker; Ruth Walsh
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Assessment of a novel, high-resolution, color, AMLCD for diagnostic medical image display: luminance performance and DICOM calibration.

Authors:  Alice N Averbukh; David S Channin; Michael J Flynn
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2003-12-15       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to diagnostic accuracy of lesion characterization in breast tissue biopsy specimens.

Authors:  Cherie M Kuzmiak; Gregory A Millnamow; Bahjat Qaqish; Etta D Pisano; Elodia B Cole; Marylee E Brown
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  High-fidelity electronic display of digital radiographs.

Authors:  M J Flynn; J Kanicki; A Badano; W R Eyler
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.

Authors:  J M Lewin; R E Hendrick; C J D'Orsi; P K Isaacs; L J Moss; A Karellas; G A Sisney; C C Kuni; G R Cutter
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  John M Lewin; Carl J D'Orsi; R Edward Hendrick; Lawrence J Moss; Pamela K Isaacs; Andrew Karellas; Gary R Cutter
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.959

  7 in total
  3 in total

1.  Digital mammography: comparative performance of color LCD and monochrome CRT displays.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Ananth Poolla; Michael J Ulissey; John M Lewin
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  Medical grade vs off-the-shelf color displays: influence on observer performance and visual search.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-09-03       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Investigation of optimal display size for viewing T1-weighted MR images of the brain using a digital contrast-detail phantom.

Authors:  Hideki Fujita; Nao Kuwahata; Hiroyuki Hattori; Hiroshi Kinoshita; Haruyuki Fukuda
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.