Information loss in visual assessments of medical images

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 362-366

  Niimi, Takanaga ^a   Imai, Kuniharu ^a   Maeda, Hisatoshi ^a   Ikeda, Mitsuru ^a  

^a NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Contrast detail (C D) analysis; Information loss; Information theory; Visual assessment

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST MEDIA; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEMS; INFORMATION THEORY; RADIOGRAPHY; VISUAL COMMUNICATION;

CONTRAST-DETAIL (C-D) ANALYSIS; INFORMATION LOSS; VISUAL ASSESSMENT;

MEDICAL IMAGING;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; ENTROPY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INFORMATION SCIENCE; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE;

CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; HUMANS; INFORMATION THEORY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 33846245577     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.09.009     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. van Heesewijk H.P.M., van der Graff Y., de Valois J.C., et al. Effects of dose reduction on digital chest imaging using a selenium detector: a study of detecting simulated diffuse interstitial pulmonary disease. AJR 167 (1996) 403-408
2. Samei E., Flynn M.J., and Eyler W.R. Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs. Radiology 213 (1999) 727-734
3. Ikeda M., Ishigaki T., and Itoh S. Influence of rib structure on detection of subtle lung nodules. Eur J Radiol 59 1 (2006) 49-55
4. Burger G.C.E. Phantom tests with X-rays. Philips Tech Rev 11 (1950) 291-298
5. Thijssen M.A.O., Bijkerk K.R., and van der Burght M.J.K. Manual CDRAD-phantom type 2.0. Project quality assurance in radiology (1998), Department of Radiology University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
6. Borasi G., Samei E., Bertolini M., et al. Contrast-detail analysis of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography. Med Phys 33 (2006) 1707-1719
7. Pascoal A., Lawinski C.P., Honey I., et al. Evaluation of a software package for automated quality assessment of contrast detail images comparison with subjective visual assessment. Phys Med Biol 50 (2005) 5743-5757
8. Loo L.N.D., Doi K., Ishida M., et al. An empirical investigation of variability in contrast-detail diagram measurements. SPIE Proc 419 (1983) 68-76
9. Suryanarayanan S., Karellas A., Vedantham S., et al. Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. Radiology 225 (2002) 801-807
10. Hanley J.A., and McNeil B.J. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143 (1982) 29-36
11. Obuchowski N.A. Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 229 (2003) 3-8
12. Thijssen MAO, Thijssen HOM, Merx JL, et al. A definition of image quality: the image quality figure. BIR report 20: optimization of image quality and patient exposure in diagnostic radiology; 1989.
13. Thijssen M.A.O., Thijssen H.O.M., Merx J.L., et al. Quality analysis of DSA equipment. Neuroradiology 30 (1988) 561-568
14. Shannon C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27 (1948) 379-423
15. Shannon C.E., and Weaver W. The mathematical theory of communication (1949), The University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois
16. Niimi T., Imai K., Ikeda M., et al. A method of clustering observers with different visual characteristics. Eur J Radiol 57 1 (2006) 158-161
17. Zähringer M., Krug B., Kamm K.F., et al. Detection of porcine bone lesions and fissures: comparing digital selenium, digital luminescence, and analog film-screen radiography. AJR 177 (2001) 1397-1403
18. Ludwig K., Schülke C., Diederich S., et al. Detection of subtle undisplaced rib fractures in a porcine model: radiation dose requirement-digital flat-panel versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems. Radiology 227 (2003) 163-168
19. Weatherburn G., Ridout D., Strickland N., et al. A comparison of conventional film, CR hard copy and PACS soft copy images of the chest: analyses of ROC curves and inter-observer agreement. Eur J Radiol 47 3 (2003) 206-214
20. Metz S., Damoser P., Hollweck R., et al. Chest radiography with a digital flat-panel detector: experimental receiver operating characteristic analysis. Radiology 234 (2005) 776-784
21. Fischback F., Ricke J., Freund T., et al. Flat-panel digital radiography compared with storage phosphor computed radiography: assessment of dose versus image quality in phantom studies. Invest Radiol 37 (2002) 609-614