Effects of luminance and resolution on observer performance with chest radiographs

Radiology

Volumn 215, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 169-174

  Herron, John M ^a   Bender, Thomas M ^a   Campbell, William L ^a   Sumkin, Jules H ^a   Rockette, Howard E ^b   Gur, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Diagnostic radiology, observer performance; Images, display; Lung, neoplasms; Pneumothorax; Ribs, fracture

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; LUMINANCE; LUNG NODULE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; OPTICAL RESOLUTION; PNEUMOTHORAX; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RIB FRACTURE; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 0034068352     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.215.1.r00ap34169     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Blume H, Roehrig H, Brown M, Ji TL, Comparison of the physical performance of high resolution CRT displays and films recorded by laser image printers and displayed on light-boxes and the need for a display standard. Proc SPIE 1990; 1232:97-114.
2. Arend LF., Spehar B. Lightness, brightness, and brightness contrast. I. Illuminance variation. Percept Psychophys 1993; 54: 446-456.
3. Peli E. Suprathreshold contrast perception across differences in mean luminance: effects of stimulus size, dichoptic presentation, and length of adaptation. J Opt Soc Am 1995; 12:817-823.
4. Britton CA, Sumkin JH, Curtin HD, et al. Subjective perceptions of and attitudes toward primary interpretation of x-ray images in a PACS environment. Proc SPIE 1990; 1234:94-97.
5. Thaete FL, Fuhrman CR, Oliver JH, et al. Digital radiography and conventional imaging of the chest. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:575-581.
6. Slasky BS, Rosenthal MS, Fuhrman CR, et al. Primary diagnosis of chest images in a PACS environment. Proc SPIE 1990; 1234: 120-125.
7. Shaw CC, Herron J, Gur D. Pixel averaging versus digitization using larger apertures: a comparison of the spatial resolution properties. Proc SPIE 1992; 1651:128-133.
8. Good WF, Maitz G, King J, Gennari R, Gur D. Observer-performance assessment of JPEG-compressed high-resolution chest images. Proc SPIE 1999; 3663:8-13.
9. Herron JH, Chang YH. A computer-controlled light box with uniform luminance at selectable levels for observer performance studies. Proc SPIE 1995; 2431:526-529.
10. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143:29-36.
11. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiving operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148:839-843.
12. Rockette HE, Obuchowski NA, Gur D. Non-parametric estimation of degenerate ROC data sets used for comparison of imaging systems. Invest Radiol 1990; 25: 835-837.
13. Thompson ML, Zucchini W. On the statistical analysis of ROC curves. Stat Med 1989; 8:1277-1290.
14. Page EB. Ordered hypotheses for multiple treatments: a significance test for linear ranks. J Am Stat Assoc 1963; 58:216-230.
15. Pilgram TK, Slone RM, Muka E, Cox JR, Blaine J. Perceived fidelity of compressed and reconstructed radiological images: a preliminary exploration of compression, luminance, and viewing distance. J Digit Imaging 1998; 11:168-175.
16. Peli E, Arend L, Labianca AT. Contrast perception across changes in luminance and spatial frequency. J Opt Soc Am 1996; 13:1953-1959.
17. Otto D, Bernhardt TM, Rapp-Bernhardt U, et al. Subtle pulmonary abnormalities: detection on monitors with varying spatial resolutions and maximum luminance levels compared with detection on storage phosphor radiographic hard copies. Radiology 1998; 207:237-242.
18. Larson A, Lynch DA, Zeligman B, et al. Accuracy of diagnosis of subtle chest disease and subtle fractures with a teleradiology system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:19-22.
19. Barten PGJ. Physical model for the contrast sensitivity of the human eye. Proc SPIE 1992; 1666:57-72.
20. Kimme-Smith C, Haus AG, DeBruhl N, Bassett LW. Effects of ambient light and view box luminance on the detection of calcifications in mammography. AJR AmJ Roentgenol 1997; 168:775-778.
21. Cook LT, Cox GG, Insana MF, et al. Comparison of a cathode-ray-tube and film for the display of computed radiographic images. Med Phys 1998; 25:1132-1138.
22. MacMahon H, Vyborny CJ, Metz CE, Doi K, Sabetti V, Solomon SL. Digital radiography of subtle pulmonary abnormalities: an ROC study of the effect of pixel size on observer performance. Radiology 1986; 158:21-26.