The influence of liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors on observer performance for the detection of nodular lesions on chest radiographs

European Radiology

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 726-732

  Usami, Hus ^a   Ikeda, M ^b   Ishigakil, T ^a   Fukushima, H ^a   Shimamoto, K ^b  

^a NAGOYA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Lung, diagnosis; Lung, nodule; Observer performance; Radiography, digital; Thorax, radiography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIQUID CRYSTAL; LUMINANCE; LUNG CANCER; LUNG NODULE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MONITOR; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RELIABILITY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COIN LESION, PULMONARY; DATA DISPLAY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIQUID CRYSTALS; MALE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; ROC CURVE;

EID: 33746641335     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-005-0030-3     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Iwano S, Ishigaki T, Shimamoto K et al (2001) Detection of subtle pulmonary disease on CR chest images: Monochromatic CRT monitor vs color CRT monitor. Eur Radiol 11:59-64
2. Hertzberg BS, Kliewer MA, Paulson EK et al (1999) PACS in sonography: accuracy of interpretation using film compared with monitor display. Picture archiving and communication systems. Am J Roentgenol 173:1175-1179
3. Ishigaki T, Endo T, Ikeda M et al (1996) Subtle pulmonary disease: detection with computed radiography versus conventional chest radiography. Radiology 201:51-60
4. Wilson AJ (1995) Filmless musculoskeletal radiology: Why is it taking so long? Am J Roentgenol 165:105-107
5. Razavi M, Sayre JW, Taira RK et al (1992) Receiver-operating-characteristic study of chest radiographs in children: Digital hard-copy film vs 2K × 2K soft-copy images. Am J Roentgenol 158:443-448
6. Straub WH, Gur D, Good WF et al (1991) Primary CT diagnosis of abdominal masses in a PACS environment. Radiology 178:739-743
7. Slasky BS, Gur D, Good WF et al (1990) Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images. Radiology 174:775-780
8. Foley WD, Jacobson DR, Taylor AJ et al (1990) Display of CT studies on a two-screen electronic workstation versus a film panel alternator: sensitivity and efficiency among radiologists. Radiology 174:769-773
9. Hayrapetian A, Aberle DR, Huang HK et al (1989) Comparison of 2,048-line digital display formats and conventional radiographs: An ROC study. Am J Roentgenol 152:1113-1118
10. Goodman LR, Foley WD, Wilson CR, Rimm AA, Lawson TL (1986) Digital and conventional chest images: Observer performance with film digital radiography system. Radiology 158:27-33
11. Flynn MJ, Kanicki J, Badano A, Eyler WR (1999) High-fidelity electronic display of digital radiographs. RadioGraphics 19:1653-1669
12. Kim AY, Cho KS, Song KS, Kim JH, Kim JG, Ha HK (2001) Urinary calculi on computed radiography: Comparison of observer performance with hard-copy versus soft-copy images on different viewer systems. Am J Roentgenol 177:331-335
13. Samei E, Seibert JA, Andriole K et al (2004) AAPM/RSNA Tutorial on equipment selectionG PACS equipment overview: general guidelines for purchasing and acceptance testing of PACS equipment. RadioGraphics 24:313-334
14. Harisinghani MG, Blake MA, Saksena M et al (2004) Importance and effects of altered workplace ergonomics in modern radiology suites. RadioGraphics 24:615-627
15. Badano A (2004) AAPM/RSNA Tutorial on equipment selection: PACS equipment overview: Display systems. RadioGraphics 24:879-889
16. Scharitzer M, Prokop M, Weber M, Fuchsjager M, Oschatz E, Schaefer-Prokop C (2005) Detectability of catheters on bedside chest radiographs: Comparison between liquid crystal display and high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitors. Radiology 234:611-616
17. Langer S, Bartholmai B, Fetterly K et al (2004) SCAR R&D Symposium 2003: Comparing the efficacy of 5-MP CRT versus 3-MP LCD in the evaluation of interstitial lung disease. J Digit Imaging 17:149-157
18. Partan G, Mayrhofer R, Urban M, Wassipaul M, Pichler L, Hruby W (2003) Diagnostic performance of liquid crystal and cathode-ray-tube monitors in brain computed tomography. Eur Radiol 13:2397-2401
19. Shiraishi J, Katsuragawa S, Ikezoe J et al (2000) Development of a digital image database for chest radiographs with and without a lung nodule: Receiver operating characteristic analysis of radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules. Am J Roentgenol 174:71-74
20. Kobayashi T, Xu XW, MacMahon H, Metz CE, Doi K (1996) Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists' performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology 199:843-848
21. Itoh Y, Ishigaki T, Sakuma S et al (1992) Influence of CRT workstation on observer's performance. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 37:253-258
22. Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH (1998) Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 17:1033-1053
23. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE (1992) Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 27:723-731
24. Roe CA, Metz CE (1997) Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method for statistical analysis of multireader, multimodality receiver operating characteristic data: Validation with computer simulation. Acad Radiol 4:298-303
25. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2001) Computer-assisted research design and analysis. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, UK
26. Hochberg Y, Tamhane AC (1987) Multiple comparison procedures. John Wiley & Sons, New York
27. Sund P, Båth M, Kheddache S, Månsson LG (2004) Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography. Eur Radiol 14:48-58