Literature DB >> 8814765

Subjective quality assessment of computed radiography hand images.

C A Britton1, O F Gabriele, T S Chang, J D Towers, D A Rubin, W F Good, D Gur.   

Abstract

To evaluate the sensitivity of a non-receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) study in assessing small differences of perceived image quality of hand images acquired by computed radiography (CR) and conventional screen-film systems, hand images were acquired on 12 patients with both conventional screen-film and CR. Each CR image was then processed with three different edge-enhancement algorithms. One conventional film and four CR images were then viewed side by side by five radiologists. Observers rated perceived image quality of each radiograph using a 10-category discrete scale. The study was repeated after 6 weeks using a different block randomization scheme. Despite the small sample size, significant differences (P < .05) in assigned image quality were detected among CR images acquired at low, medium, and high resolutions. Image processing routines did not fully compensate for differences in quality between conventional film and CR-acquired images. The quality rating of the reference conventional image was found to be dependent on the quality of images with which it was compared. Small, highly sensitive study designs can be used to identify radiologists' perceived differences in image quality. "Reference" or "gold standard" quality are important in such studies. Edge-enhancement schemes cannot fully compensate for perceived image quality degradations because of reduced image resolution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8814765     DOI: 10.1007/bf03168564

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


  6 in total

1.  Digital skeletal radiography: spatial resolution requirements for detection of subperiosteal resorption.

Authors:  M D Murphey
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Storage phosphor radiographs vs conventional films: interpreters' perceptions of diagnostic quality.

Authors:  C R Fuhrman; D Gur; B Good; H Rockette; L A Cooperstein; J H Feist
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Subjective and objective assessment of image quality--a comparison.

Authors:  W F Good; D Gur; J H Feist; F L Thaete; C R Fuhrman; C A Britton; B S Slasky
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Film-screen vs. digital radiography in rheumatoid arthritis of the hand. An ROC analysis.

Authors:  A Jónsson; A Borg; P Hannesson; K Herrlin; K Jonsson; M Sloth; H Petterson
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 1.990

5.  Operating at the diagnostic margins: image quality considerations.

Authors:  D Gur
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Photostimulable phosphor digital radiography of the extremities: diagnostic accuracy compared with conventional radiography.

Authors:  A J Wilson; F A Mann; W A Murphy; B S Monsees; M R Linn
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 3.959

  6 in total
  3 in total

1.  Clinical evaluation of irreversible data compression for computed radiography of the hand.

Authors:  K Uchida; H Watanabe; T Aoki; K Nakamura; H Nakata
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Forced choice and ordinal discrete rating assessment of image quality: a comparison.

Authors:  D Gur; D A Rubin; B H Kart; A M Peterson; C R Fuhrman; H E Rockette; J L King
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Improved fracture detection using the mammographic film-screen combination.

Authors:  Y Faridah; Bjj Abdullah; Kh Ng
Journal:  Biomed Imaging Interv J       Date:  2005-07-01
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.