Literature DB >> 26969762

Correlation between subjective and objective assessment of magnetic resonance (MR) images.

Li Sze Chow1, Heshalini Rajagopal2, Raveendran Paramesran3.   

Abstract

Medical Image Quality Assessment (IQA) plays an important role in assisting and evaluating the development of any new hardware, imaging sequences, pre-processing or post-processing algorithms. We have performed a quantitative analysis of the correlation between subjective and objective Full Reference - IQA (FR-IQA) on Magnetic Resonance (MR) images of the human brain, spine, knee and abdomen. We have created a MR image database that consists of 25 original reference images and 750 distorted images. The reference images were distorted with six types of distortions: Rician Noise, Gaussian White Noise, Gaussian Blur, DCT compression, JPEG compression and JPEG2000 compression, at various levels of distortion. Twenty eight subjects were chosen to evaluate the images resulting in a total of 21,700 human evaluations. The raw scores were then converted to Difference Mean Opinion Score (DMOS). Thirteen objective FR-IQA metrics were used to determine the validity of the subjective DMOS. The results indicate a high correlation between the subjective and objective assessment of the MR images. The Noise Quality Measurement (NQM) has the highest correlation with DMOS, where the mean Pearson Linear Correlation Coefficient (PLCC) and Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient (SROCC) are 0.936 and 0.938 respectively. The Universal Quality Index (UQI) has the lowest correlation with DMOS, where the mean PLCC and SROCC are 0.807 and 0.815 respectively. Student's T-test was used to find the difference in performance of FR-IQA across different types of distortion. The superior IQAs tested statistically are UQI for Rician noise images, Visual Information Fidelity (VIF) for Gaussian blur images, NQM for both DCT and JPEG compressed images, Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR) for JPEG2000 compressed images.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Difference Mean Opinion Score (DMOS); Full Reference—Image Quality Assessment (FR-IQA); Objective assessment; Subjective assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26969762     DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2016.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  6 in total

1.  A shallow convolutional neural network for blind image sharpness assessment.

Authors:  Shaode Yu; Shibin Wu; Lei Wang; Fan Jiang; Yaoqin Xie; Leida Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  No-reference quality assessment for image-based assessment of economically important tropical woods.

Authors:  Heshalini Rajagopal; Norrima Mokhtar; Tengku Faiz Tengku Mohmed Noor Izam; Wan Khairunizam Wan Ahmad
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Magnetic Resonance Image Quality Assessment by Using Non-Maximum Suppression and Entropy Analysis.

Authors:  Rafał Obuchowicz; Mariusz Oszust; Marzena Bielecka; Andrzej Bielecki; Adam Piórkowski
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-16       Impact factor: 2.524

4.  A consistency evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio in the quality assessment of human brain magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Shaode Yu; Guangzhe Dai; Zhaoyang Wang; Leida Li; Xinhua Wei; Yaoqin Xie
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 1.930

5.  A Low-Light Sensor Image Enhancement Algorithm Based on HSI Color Model.

Authors:  Shiping Ma; Hongqiang Ma; Yuelei Xu; Shuai Li; Chao Lv; Mingming Zhu
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 3.576

6.  Development and validation of image quality scoring criteria (IQSC) for pediatric CT: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Atul M Padole; Pallavi Sagar; Sjirk J Westra; Ruth Lim; Katherine Nimkin; Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael S Gee; Madan M Rehani
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2019-09-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.