Literature DB >> 16094505

Assessment of PACS display systems.

John E Aldrich1, John D Rutledge.   

Abstract

This work describes our experience in reviewing the performance criteria for display systems and how we have implemented a practical approach to the assessment of the workstation environment in a large tertiary care hospital. The acceptance criteria contained in the draft report of Topic Group 18 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) were used as a basis for assessment of primary and secondary displays. A telescopic photometer was used to measure the maximum luminance and the contrast ratio of the image for the displays used in our radiology department and in the operating and emergency rooms using the standard Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) pattern, in ambient light and with light decreased as much as possible. About half of the displays met the AAPM criteria for minimum luminance and contrast ratio in low light. None of the systems met the contrast ratio criteria in ambient light. The challenges in improving the performance and calibrating displays are discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16094505      PMCID: PMC3046721          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-005-6974-7

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


  6 in total

1.  Contrast-detail characteristic evaluations of several display devices.

Authors:  J Wang; J Anderson; T Lane; C Stetson; J Moore
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Effect of room illuminance on monitor black level luminance and monitor calibration.

Authors:  K Chakrabarti; R V Kaczmarek; J A Thomas; A Romanyukha
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2004-01-30       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Proposal of a quality-index or metric for soft copy display systems: contrast sensitivity study.

Authors:  Jihong Wang; Ken Compton; Qi Peng
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2003-09-11       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Angular dependence of the luminance and contrast in medical monochrome liquid crystal displays.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Michael J Flynn; Sandrine Martin; Jerzy Kanicki
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Noise in flat-panel displays with subpixel structure.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Robert M Gagne; Robert J Jennings; Sarah E Drilling; Benjamin R Imhoff; Edward Muka
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  The digital imaging workstation. 1990.

Authors:  Ronald L Arenson; Dev P Chakraborty; Sridhar B Seshadri; Harold L Kundel
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.056

  6 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  Soft-copy display and reading: what the radiologist should know in the digital era.

Authors:  Erich Sorantin
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2008-06-12

2.  Transition to computed radiography: can emergency medicine doctors accurately predict the need of film printing to facilitate optimal patient care?

Authors:  Siu Ming Yang; Chor Man Lo
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2011

3.  Comparison of the commercial color LCD and the medical monochrome LCD using randomized object test patterns.

Authors:  Jay Wu; Tung H Wu; Rou P Han; Shu J Chang; Cheng T Shih; Jing Y Sun; Shih M Hsu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Medical imaging informatics: how it improves radiology practice today.

Authors:  J Raymond Geis
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 4.056

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.