Soili Kallio-Pulkkinen1, Marianne Haapea2, Esa Liukkonen3, Sisko Huumonen4, Osmo Tervonen5, Miika T Nieminen6. 1. Oral and Maxillofacial radiologist, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital; Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. Electronic address: soili.kallio-pulkkinen@oulu.fi. 2. Biostatistician, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland. 3. Study-coordinator, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital; Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. 4. Senior Lecturer, Department of Diagnostics and Oral Medicine, Institute of Dentistry, University of Turku, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 5. Professor, Department of Radiology, Institute of Diagnostics, University of Oulu; Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. 6. Professor of medical physics, Department of Radiology, Institute of Diagnostics, University of Oulu; Chief physicist, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital; Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare observer performance in the detection of anatomical structures and pathology in panoramic radiographs using a consumer grade display and tablet (3(rd) generation iPad; Cupertino, CA, USA) under suboptimal conditions compared to 6 MegaPixels (6 MP) display under dim lighting conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty panoramic radiographs were selected. All images were blindly evaluated on three displays by two observers with different amounts of experience. Consumer grade display and tablet evaluations were made under approximately 510 lx ambient light and 6MP display evaluations under approx. 16 lx. RESULTS: The observer performance of an experienced observer did not differ between different displays whereas the less experienced observer performed better with 6MP display than with consumer grade display or tablet. CONCLUSIONS: A dentist with less experience in interpreting panoramic radiographs may be more dependent on the high-quality display used under optimal viewing conditions to detect anatomical structures and pathology compared to a more experienced dentist.
OBJECTIVE: To compare observer performance in the detection of anatomical structures and pathology in panoramic radiographs using a consumer grade display and tablet (3(rd) generation iPad; Cupertino, CA, USA) under suboptimal conditions compared to 6 MegaPixels (6 MP) display under dim lighting conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty panoramic radiographs were selected. All images were blindly evaluated on three displays by two observers with different amounts of experience. Consumer grade display and tablet evaluations were made under approximately 510 lx ambient light and 6MP display evaluations under approx. 16 lx. RESULTS: The observer performance of an experienced observer did not differ between different displays whereas the less experienced observer performed better with 6MP display than with consumer grade display or tablet. CONCLUSIONS: A dentist with less experience in interpreting panoramic radiographs may be more dependent on the high-quality display used under optimal viewing conditions to detect anatomical structures and pathology compared to a more experienced dentist.
Authors: S Kallio-Pulkkinen; M Haapea; E Liukkonen; S Huumonen; O Tervonen; M T Nieminen Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Adriana D Cruz; Maria Cn Castro; Marcelo F Aguiar; Ludmilla S Guimarães; Cinthya C Gomes Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2018-03-12 Impact factor: 2.419