Clinical verification of TG18 methodology for display quality evaluation

Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering

Volumn 5029, Issue , 2003, Pages 484-492

  Samei, Ehsan ^a   Shepard, S Jeff ^b   Fetterly, Kenneth A ^c   Kim, Hee Joung ^d   Roehrig, Hans ^e   Flynn, Michael J ^f  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^d Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^f HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambient lighting; Cathode ray tube (CRT); Display quality; Image quality; Liquid crystal display (LCD); Luminance; Medical imaging; PACS; Resolution; TG18

Indexed keywords

CATHODE RAY TUBES; DATABASE SYSTEMS; FOCUSING; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; LIGHT REFLECTION; LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAYS; SPURIOUS SIGNAL NOISE;

DISPLAY QUALITY; GEOMETRICAL DISTORTION; LUMINANCE RESPONSE; LUMINANCE UNIFORMITY;

MEDICAL IMAGING;

EID: 0041624057     PISSN: 0277786X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1117/12.480381     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Flynn MJ, Badano A, Image Quality Degradation by Light Scattering in Display Devices, J Digital Imaging 12:50-59, 1999.
2. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, Compton K, Cornelius C, Corrigan K, Flynn MJ, Hemminger B, Hangiandreou N, Johnson J, Moxley M, Pavlicek W, Roehrig H, Rutz L, Shepard J, Uzenoff R, Wang J, and Willis C. Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems. Draft Report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 18, Version 9.0, October 2002 (http://deckard.mc.duke.edu/tg18).
3. Compton KD, Factors affecting CRT display performance: specifying what works, Proc. SPIE Vol. 3976, pp. 412-423, 2000.
4. Parr LF, Anderson AL, Glennon BK, Fetherson P, Quality control issues on high-resolution diagnostic monitors. J. Digital Imaging 14: 22-26, 2001.
5. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper F, Briscoe B, Severance S, Brower SG, Effect of computer monitor quality on radiologist productivity in the softcopy interpretation of chest computed radiography images. Society of Computer Applications in Radiology (SCAR) conference, Salt Lake City, UT, May 2001.
6. Abdullah BJJ, Ng K-H, In the eyes of the beholder: what we see is not what we get. British J. Radiology 74:675-676, 2001.
7. SMPTE RP133, Specifications for Medical Diagnostic Imaging Test Pattern for Television Monitors and Hardcopy Recording Cameras, Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers (SMPTE), White Plains, NY, 1991.
8. NEMA PS 3.14, Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Part 14: Grayscale Display Standard Function, National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), Rosslyn, VA, 2000 (http://www.nema.org).
9. DIN 6868-57 2001, Image quality assurance in x-ray diagnostics, Acceptance testing for image display devices, The German Standards Institution, Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V., February 2001.
10. VESA; Flat Panel Display Measurements Standard (FPDM), Version 2.0, June 2001, Video Electronics Standards Association, Milpitas, CA, 2001 (http://www.vesa.org).
11. American College of Radiology (ACR), ACR Standard for Teleradiology, 1999. American College of Radiology, 1891 Preston White Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4397 (http://www.acr.org).
12. Badano A, Flynn MJ, Kanicki J, Accurate small spot luminance measurements, Displays 23:177-182, 2002.