Miguel A Lago1, Ioannis Sechopoulos2,3, François O Bochud4, Miguel P Eckstein1. 1. University of California, Institute for Collaborative Biotechnologies, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Santa Barbara, California, United States. 2. Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 3. Dutch Expert Centre for Screening, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 4. University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Institute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract
Purpose: With three-dimensional (3-D) images displayed as stacks of 2-D images, radiologists rely more heavily on vision away from their fixation point to visually process information, guide eye movements, and detect abnormalities. Thus the ability to detect targets away from the fixation point, commonly characterized as the useful field of view (UFOV), becomes critical for these 3-D imaging modalities. We investigate how the UFOV, defined as the eccentricity, in which detection performance degrades to a given probability, varies across imaging modalities and targets. Approach: We measure the detectability of different targets at various distances from gaze locations for single slices of liver computed tomography (CT), 2-D digital mammograms (DM), and single slices of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) cases. Observers with varying expertise were instructed to maintain their gaze at a point while a short display of the image was flashed and an eye tracker verified observer's steady fixation. Display times were 200 and 1000 ms for CT images and 500 ms for DM and DBT images. Results: We find variations in the UFOV from 9 to 12 deg for liver CT to as small as 2.5 to 5 deg for calcification clusters in breast images (DM and DBT). We compare our results to those reported in the literature for lung nodules and discuss the differences across methods used to measure the UFOV, their dependence on case selection/task difficulty, viewing conditions, and observer expertise. We propose a complementary measure defined in terms of performance degradation relative to the peak foveal performance (relative-UFOV) to circumvent UFOV's variations with case selection/task difficulty. Conclusion: Our results highlight the variations in the UFOV across imaging modalities, target types, observer expertise, and measurement methods and suggest an additional relative-UFOV measure to more thoroughly characterize the detection performance away from point of fixation.
Purpose: With three-dimensional (3-D) images displayed as stacks of 2-D images, radiologists rely more heavily on vision away from their fixation point to visually process information, guide eye movements, and detect abnormalities. Thus the ability to detect targets away from the fixation point, commonly characterized as the useful field of view (UFOV), becomes critical for these 3-D imaging modalities. We investigate how the UFOV, defined as the eccentricity, in which detection performance degrades to a given probability, varies across imaging modalities and targets. Approach: We measure the detectability of different targets at various distances from gaze locations for single slices of liver computed tomography (CT), 2-D digital mammograms (DM), and single slices of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) cases. Observers with varying expertise were instructed to maintain their gaze at a point while a short display of the image was flashed and an eye tracker verified observer's steady fixation. Display times were 200 and 1000 ms for CT images and 500 ms for DM and DBT images. Results: We find variations in the UFOV from 9 to 12 deg for liver CT to as small as 2.5 to 5 deg for calcification clusters in breast images (DM and DBT). We compare our results to those reported in the literature for lung nodules and discuss the differences across methods used to measure the UFOV, their dependence on case selection/task difficulty, viewing conditions, and observer expertise. We propose a complementary measure defined in terms of performance degradation relative to the peak foveal performance (relative-UFOV) to circumvent UFOV's variations with case selection/task difficulty. Conclusion: Our results highlight the variations in the UFOV across imaging modalities, target types, observer expertise, and measurement methods and suggest an additional relative-UFOV measure to more thoroughly characterize the detection performance away from point of fixation.
Authors: Mitra Noroozian; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Sahand Rahnama-Moghadam; Katherine A Klein; Deborah O Jeffries; Renee W Pinsky; Heang-Ping Chan; Paul L Carson; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Trafton Drew; Melissa Le-Hoa Vo; Alex Olwal; Francine Jacobson; Steven E Seltzer; Jeremy M Wolfe Journal: J Vis Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 2.240
Authors: Alexandre Ba; Marwa Shams; Sabine Schmidt; Miguel P Eckstein; Francis R Verdun; François O Bochud Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2020-07-24