Literature DB >> 22535193

Verification of DICOM GSDF in complex backgrounds.

David L Leong1, Louise Rainford, Tamara Miner Haygood, Gary J Whitman, Philip M Tchou, William R Geiser, Selin Carkaci, Patrick C Brennan.   

Abstract

While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the detection threshold and whether the median background intensity shift has been minimized by GSDF remains unknown. We set out to determine if the median background affected the detection of a low-contrast object in a clustered lumpy background, which simulated a mammography image, and to define the contrast detection threshold for these complex images. Clustered lumpy background images were created of different median intensities and disks of varying contrasts were inserted. A reader study was performed with 17 readers of varying skill level who scored with a five-point confidence scale whether a disk was present. The results were analyzed using reader operating characteristic (ROC) methodology. Contingency tables were used to determine the contrast detection threshold. No statistically significant difference was seen in the area under the ROC curve across all of the backgrounds. Contrast detection fell below 50 % between +3 and +2 gray levels. Our work supports the conclusion that Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine GSDF calibrated monitors do perceptually linearize detection performance across shifts in median background intensity. The contrast detection threshold was determined to be +3 gray levels above the background for an object of 1° visual angle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22535193      PMCID: PMC3447097          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-012-9478-2

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


  22 in total

1.  Visual detection and localization of radiographic images.

Authors:  S J Starr; C E Metz; L B Lusted; D J Goodenough
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The "memory effect" for repeated radiologic observations.

Authors:  John T Ryan; Tamara Miner Haygood; José-Miguel Yamal; Michael Evanoff; Paul O'Sullivan; Mark McEntee; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis; Kevin S Berbaum
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.173

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

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; 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
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology.

Authors:  Sara Börjesson; Markus Håkansson; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Sune Svensson; Anders Tingberg; Anna Grahn; Mark Ruschin; Bengt Hemdal; Sören Mattsson; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

6.  A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods for multiple observer ROC analysis.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-02-10       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis; Kevin S Berbaum; Charles E Metz
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Letter: Grating contrast: discrimination may be better than detection.

Authors:  J Nachmias; R V Sansbury
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1974-10       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Contrast masking in human vision.

Authors:  G E Legge; J M Foley
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1980-12

10.  Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise.

Authors:  A E Burgess; F L Jacobson; P F Judy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  5 in total

1.  Trend of contrast detection threshold with and without localization.

Authors:  David L Leong; Louise Rainford; Tamara Miner Haygood; Gary J Whitman; William R Geiser; Beatriz E Adrada; Lumarie Santiago; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Method for Adapting the Grayscale Standard Display Function to the Aging Eye.

Authors:  Giovanni Ramponi; Aldo Badano
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Visual grading characteristics and ordinal regression analysis during optimisation of CT head examinations.

Authors:  Francis Zarb; Mark F McEntee; Louise Rainford
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2014-12-16

Review 4.  Multi-reader multi-case studies using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve as a measure of diagnostic accuracy: systematic review with a focus on quality of data reporting.

Authors:  Thaworn Dendumrongsup; Andrew A Plumb; Steve Halligan; Thomas R Fanshawe; Douglas G Altman; Susan Mallett
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Standards and Guidelines in Telemedicine and Telehealth.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; Jordana Bernard
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2014-02-12
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.