Statistics of ultrasonic scatterer size estimation with a reference phantom

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 113, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 3430-3437

  Gerig, Anthony ^a   Zagzebski, James ^a   Varghese, Tomy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACKSCATTERING; FUNCTIONS; LEAST SQUARES APPROXIMATIONS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; ULTRASONIC SCATTERING;

LEAST SQUARE SIZE ESTIMATOR;

ACOUSTICS;

ULTRASONICS;

ARTICLE; B SCAN; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; EXPERIMENTAL MODEL; FREQUENCY ANALYZER; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL MODEL; ULTRASOUND;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; HUMANS; LEAST-SQUARES ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; SCATTERING, RADIATION; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 0038661387     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.1568945     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. M. Insana, Int. Rev. Exp. Pathol. 36, 73 (1996).
2. M. Insana and T. Hall, Ultrason. Imaging 12, 245 (1990).
3. M. Insana, T. Hall, J. Wood et al., Invest. Radiol. 28, 720 (1993).
4. T. Hall, M. Insana, L. Harrison et al., Ultrasound Med. Biol. 22, 987 (1996).
5. M. Insana and T. Hall, Phys. Med. Biol. 35, 1373 (1990).
6. M. Insana, R. Wagner, D. Brown et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 179 (1990).
7. M. Insana, T. Hall, and L. Cook, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 41, 714 (1994).
8. J.-F. Chen, J. Zagzebski, F. Dong et al., Med. Phys. 25, 648 (1998).
9. P. Chaturvedi and M. Insana, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100, 392 (1996).
10. F. Lizzi, E. Feleppa, M. Astor et al., IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 44, 935 (1997).
11. M. Insana and D. Brown, in Ultrasonic Scattering in Biological Tissues, edited by Kirk Shung (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1993), p. 75.
12. P. Bevington and K. Robinson, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992).
13. J. Faran, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 23, 405 (1951).
14. R. Wagner, M. Insana, and S. Smith, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 35, 34 (1988).
15. When using sample and reference waveforms from the same medium, the value chosen for attenuation in the simulation code is actually irrelevant when estimating backscatter because the code does not include an additive noise term due to the measurement system.
16. E. Feleppa, F. Lizzi, D. Coleman et al., Ultrasound Med. Biol. 12, 623 (1986).
17. M. Oelze and W. O'Brien, Jr., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112(6), 3053 (2002).
18. L. X. Yao, J. Zagzebski, and E. Madsen, Ultrason. Imaging 12, 58 (1990).