Literature DB >> 15895604

Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report.

Ehsan Samei1, Aldo Badano, Dev Chakraborty, Ken Compton, Craig Cornelius, Kevin Corrigan, Michael J Flynn, Bradley Hemminger, Nick Hangiandreou, Jeffrey Johnson, Donna M Moxley-Stevens, William Pavlicek, Hans Roehrig, Lois Rutz, Jeffrey Shepard, Robert A Uzenoff, Jihong Wang, Charles E Willis.   

Abstract

Digital imaging provides an effective means to electronically acquire, archive, distribute, and view medical images. Medical imaging display stations are an integral part of these operations. Therefore, it is vitally important to assure that electronic display devices do not compromise image quality and ultimately patient care. The AAPM Task Group 18 (TG18) recently published guidelines and acceptance criteria for acceptance testing and quality control of medical display devices. This paper is an executive summary of the TG18 report. TG18 guidelines include visual, quantitative, and advanced testing methodologies for primary and secondary class display devices. The characteristics, tested in conjunction with specially designed test patterns (i.e., TG18 patterns), include reflection, geometric distortion, luminance, the spatial and angular dependencies of luminance, resolution, noise, glare, chromaticity, and display artifacts. Geometric distortions are evaluated by linear measurements of the TG18-QC test pattern, which should render distortion coefficients less than 2%/5% for primary/secondary displays, respectively. Reflection measurements include specular and diffuse reflection coefficients from which the maximum allowable ambient lighting is determined such that contrast degradation due to display reflection remains below a 20% limit and the level of ambient luminance (Lamb) does not unduly compromise luminance ratio (LR) and contrast at low luminance levels. Luminance evaluation relies on visual assessment of low contrast features in the TG18-CT and TG18-MP test patterns, or quantitative measurements at 18 distinct luminance levels of the TG18-LN test patterns. The major acceptable criteria for primary/ secondary displays are maximum luminance of greater than 170/100 cd/m2, LR of greater than 250/100, and contrast conformance to that of the grayscale standard display function (GSDF) of better than 10%/20%, respectively. The angular response is tested to ascertain the viewing cone within which contrast conformance to the GSDF is better than 30%/60% and LR is greater than 175/70 for primary/secondary displays, or alternatively, within which the on-axis contrast thresholds of the TG18-CT test pattern remain discernible. The evaluation of luminance spatial uniformity at two distinct luminance levels across the display faceplate using TG18-UNL test patterns should yield nonuniformity coefficients smaller than 30%. The resolution evaluation includes the visual scoring of the CX test target in the TG18-QC or TG18-CX test patterns, which should yield scores greater than 4/6 for primary/secondary displays. Noise evaluation includes visual evaluation of the contrast threshold in the TG18-AFC test pattern, which should yield a minimum of 3/2 targets visible for primary/secondary displays. The guidelines also include methodologies for more quantitative resolution and noise measurements based on MTF and NPS analyses. The display glare test, based on the visibility of the low-contrast targets of the TG18-GV test pattern or the measurement of the glare ratio (GR), is expected to yield scores greater than 3/1 and GRs greater than 400/150 for primary/secondary displays. Chromaticity, measured across a display faceplate or between two display devices, is expected to render a u',v' color separation of less than 0.01 for primary displays. The report offers further descriptions of prior standardization efforts, current display technologies, testing prerequisites, streamlined procedures and timelines, and TG18 test patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15895604     DOI: 10.1118/1.1861159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  64 in total

1.  The effects of ambient lighting in chest radiology reading rooms.

Authors:  Benjamin J Pollard; Ehsan Samei; Amarpreet S Chawla; Craig Beam; Laura E Heyneman; Lynne M Hurwitz Koweek; Santiago Martinez-Jimenez; Lacey Washington; Noriyuki Hashimoto; H Page McAdams
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Investigation of optimal viewing size for detecting nodular ground-glass opacity on high-resolution computed tomography with cine-mode display.

Authors:  Michihiro Yamaguchi; Yuichi Bessho; Tatsuro Inoue; Yoshiyuki Asai; Tomoshige Matsumoto; Kenya Murase
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2010-08-19

3.  Preliminary investigation of the clinical usefulness of super-high-resolution LCDs with 9 and 15 mega-sub-pixels: observation studies with phantoms.

Authors:  Aya Nishimura; Katsuhiro Ichikawa; Yuko Mochiya; Ayumi Morishita; Hiroko Kawashima; Tomoyuki Yamamoto; Mikio Hasegawa; Naofumi Kimura; Shigeru Sanada
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2009-12-25

4.  Effect of test patterns on measurement of the luminance of LCD devices by use of a telescopic-type luminance meter.

Authors:  Junji Morishita; Kiyoshi Dogomori; Shiro Hatanaka; Takeshi Hiwasa; Yasuhiko Nakamura; Noriyuki Hashimoto; Yoshiharu Higashida; Fukai Toyofuku; Masafumi Ohki
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2007-11-28

5.  An Evaluation of Performance Characteristics of Primary Display Devices.

Authors:  Ernest U Ekpo; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Effect of display type, DICOM calibration and room illuminance in bitewing radiographs.

Authors:  Soili Kallio-Pulkkinen; Sisko Huumonen; Marianne Haapea; Esa Liukkonen; Annina Sipola; Osmo Tervonen; Miika T Nieminen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 2.419

7.  Visual assessment of angular response in medical liquid crystal displays.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Sarah Schneider; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  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

9.  Verification of DICOM GSDF in complex backgrounds.

Authors:  David L Leong; Louise Rainford; Tamara Miner Haygood; Gary J Whitman; Philip M Tchou; William R Geiser; Selin Carkaci; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.056

10.  A filmless radiology teaching conference system for pertinent displaying and image searching.

Authors:  Katsumi Abe; Mitsuhiro Narata; Ikue Tanaka; Motoichiro Takahashi; Akihito Igarashi; Takahiro Sasaki; Kazuya Matsuyama; Naokaz Tohi; Shigeru Kosuda
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 4.056

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.