Literature DB >> 20200105

VIEWDEX: an efficient and easy-to-use software for observer performance studies.

Markus Håkansson1, Sune Svensson, Sara Zachrisson, Angelica Svalkvist, Magnus Båth, Lars Gunnar Månsson.   

Abstract

The development of investigation techniques, image processing, workstation monitors, analysing tools etc. within the field of radiology is vast, and the need for efficient tools in the evaluation and optimisation process of image and investigation quality is important. ViewDEX (Viewer for Digital Evaluation of X-ray images) is an image viewer and task manager suitable for research and optimisation tasks in medical imaging. ViewDEX is DICOM compatible and the features of the interface (tasks, image handling and functionality) are general and flexible. The configuration of a study and output (for example, answers given) can be edited in any text editor. ViewDEX is developed in Java and can run from any disc area connected to a computer. It is free to use for non-commercial purposes and can be downloaded from http://www.vgregion.se/sas/viewdex. In the present work, an evaluation of the efficiency of ViewDEX for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) studies, free-response ROC (FROC) studies and visual grading (VG) studies was conducted. For VG studies, the total scoring rate was dependent on the number of criteria per case. A scoring rate of approximately 150 cases h(-1) can be expected for a typical VG study using single images and five anatomical criteria. For ROC and FROC studies using clinical images, the scoring rate was approximately 100 cases h(-1) using single images and approximately 25 cases h(-1) using image stacks ( approximately 50 images case(-1)). In conclusion, ViewDEX is an efficient and easy-to-use software for observer performance studies.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20200105     DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncq057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry        ISSN: 0144-8420            Impact factor:   0.972


  21 in total

1.  A method to analyse observer disagreement in visual grading studies: example of assessed image quality in paediatric cerebral multidetector CT images.

Authors:  K Ledenius; E Svensson; F Stålhammar; L-M Wiklund; A Thilander-Klang
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  The impact of pediatric-specific dose modulation curves on radiation dose and image quality in head computed tomography.

Authors:  Joana Santos; Shane Foley; Graciano Paulo; Mark F McEntee; Louise Rainford
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2015-08-05

3.  ROCView: prototype software for data collection in jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis.

Authors:  J Thompson; P Hogg; S Thompson; D Manning; K Szczepura
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  An evaluation of the use of oral contrast media in abdominopelvic CT.

Authors:  Erica Lauren Buttigieg; Karen Borg Grima; Kelvin Cortis; Sandro Galea Soler; Francis Zarb
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Effect of radiation dose level on the detectability of pulmonary nodules in chest tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Sara A Asplund; Åse A Johnsson; Jenny Vikgren; Angelica Svalkvist; Agneta Flinck; Marianne Boijsen; Valeria A Fisichella; Lars Gunnar Månsson; Magnus Båth
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-04       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Visual grading analysis of digital neonatal chest phantom X-ray images: Impact of detector type, dose and image processing on image quality.

Authors:  M H Smet; L Breysem; E Mussen; H Bosmans; N W Marshall; L Cockmartin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Dependency of image quality on acquisition protocol and image processing in chest tomosynthesis-a visual grading study based on clinical data.

Authors:  Masoud Jadidi; Magnus Båth; Sven Nyrén
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-09       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  T M Svahn; D P Chakraborty; D Ikeda; S Zackrisson; Y Do; S Mattsson; I Andersson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Neonatal digital chest radiography- should we be using additional copper filtration?

Authors:  Jenna Ruth Tugwell-Allsup; Rhys Wyn Morris; Kate Thomas; Richard Hibbs; Andrew England
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  COMPARISON OF CONVENTIONAL HAND EXAMINATION ON SIX OPTIMISED DR SYSTEMS.

Authors:  Helle Precht; Claus Bjørn Outzen; Martin Weber Kusk; Malene Bisgaard; Dag Waaler
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 0.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.