The influence of liquid crystal display monitors on observer performance for the detection of interstitial lung markings on both storage phosphor and flat-panel-detector chest radiography

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 74, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 275-279

  Sung, Yon Mi ^a,b   Chung, Myung Jin ^a   Lee, Kyung Soo ^a   Choe, Bong Keun ^c  

^a Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Gachon University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^c Kyung Hee University Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Digital; Display; Images; Interstitial disease; Lung; Radiography

Indexed keywords

CHEST RADIOGRAPHS; CHEST RADIOGRAPHY; CLINICAL CONDITIONS; CLINICAL SETTINGS; COMPUTED RADIOGRAPHY; CR SYSTEM; CRT MONITORS; DETECTOR SYSTEMS; DIGITAL; DIGITAL DISPLAY; DISPLAY; GRAY SCALE; HIGH RESOLUTION; INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE; LCD MONITORS; MEGA-PIXEL; MONITOR SYSTEM; OBSERVER PERFORMANCE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC ANALYSIS; REFERENCE STANDARD; ROC ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STORAGE PHOSPHORS; THIN-SECTION CT;

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; CATHODE RAY TUBES; DETECTORS; FLUORESCENT SCREENS; LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAYS; LIQUID CRYSTALS; LUMINESCENCE; OBSERVABILITY; OPACITY; PHOSPHORS; PULMONARY DISEASES; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY; SPURIOUS SIGNAL NOISE;

MONITORING;

PHOSPHORUS; SILICON;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISPLAY SYSTEM; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE; LIQUID CRYSTAL; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; LIQUID CRYSTALS; LUNG DISEASES, INTERSTITIAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77950300766     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.02.009     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Razavi M., Sayre J.W., Taira R.K., et al. Receiver-operating-characteristic study of chest radiographs in children: digital hard-copy film vs 2K × 2K soft-copy images. Am J Roentgenol 158 (1992) 443-448
2. Hayrapetian A., Aberle D.R., Huang H.K., et al. Comparison of 2048-line digital display formats and conventional radiographs: an ROC study. Am J Roentgenol 152 (1989) 1113-1118
3. Slasky B.S., Gur D., Good W.F., et al. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images. Radiology 174 (1990) 775-780
4. Ishigaki T., Endo T., Ikeda M., et al. Subtle pulmonary disease: detection with computed radiography versus conventional chest radiography. Radiology 201 (1996) 51-60
5. Kim T.S., Im J.G., Goo J.M., et al. Detection of pulmonary edema in pigs: storage phosphor versus amorphous selenium-based flat-panel-detector radiography. Radiology 223 (2002) 695-701
6. Kroft L.J., Veldkamp W.J., Mertens B.J., Boot M.V., and Geleijns J. Comparison of eight different digital chest radiography systems: variation in detection of simulated chest disease. Am J Roentgenol 185 (2005) 339-346
7. Goo J.M., Im J.G., Lee H.J., et al. Detection of simulated chest lesions by using soft-copy reading: comparison of an amorphous silicon flat-panel-detector system and a storage-phosphor system. Radiology 224 (2002) 242-246
8. Garmer M., Hennigs S.P., Jager H.J., et al. Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging: diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. Am J Roentgenol 174 (2000) 75-80
9. Bacher K., Smeets P., Bonnarens K., De Hauwere A., Verstraete K., and Thierens H. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. Am J Roentgenol 181 (2003) 923-929
10. Gruber M., Uffmann M., Weber M., Prokop M., Balassy C., and Schaefer-Prokop C. Direct detector radiography versus dual reading computed radiography: feasibility of dose reduction in chest radiography. Eur Radiol 16 (2006) 1544-1550
11. Shin K.M., Lee K.S., Chung M.P., et al. Prognostic determinants among clinical, thin-section CT, and histopathologic findings for fibrotic idiopathic interstitial pneumonias: tertiary hospital study. Radiology 249 (2008) 328-337
12. Dorfman D.D., Berbaum K.S., and Metz C.E. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis. Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 27 (1992) 723-731
13. Obuchowski N.A. New methodological tools for multiple-reader ROC studies. Radiology 243 (2007) 10-12
14. Dofrman D.D., Berbaum K.S., and Lenth R.V. Multireader, multicase receiver operating characteristic methodology: a bootstrap analysis. Acad Radiol 2 (1995) 626-633
15. Siewerdsen J.H., Antonuk L.E., el-Mohri Y., Yorkston J., Huang W., and Cunningham I.A. Signal, noise power spectrum, and detective quantum efficiency of indirect-detection flat-panel imagers for diagnostic radiology. Med Phys 25 (1998) 614-628
16. Chotas H.G., Dobbins III J.T., and Ravin C.E. Principles of digital radiography with large-area, electronically readable detectors: a review of the basics. Radiology 210 (1999) 595-599
17. Floyd Jr. C.E., Warp R.J., Dobbins III J.T., et al. Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 218 (2001) 683-688
18. Rowlands J.A., Zhao W., Blevis I.M., Waechter D.F., and Huang Z. Flat-panel digital radiology with amorphous selenium and active-matrix readout. Radiographics 17 (1997) 753-760
19. Thaete F.L., Fuhrman C.R., Oliver J.H., et al. Digital radiography and conventional imaging of the chest: a comparison of observer performance. Am J Roentgenol 162 (1994) 575-581
20. Pavlicek W., Owen J.M., and Peter M.B. Active matrix liquid crystal displays for clinical imaging: comparison with cathode ray tube displays. J Digit Imaging 13 (2000) 155-161
21. Roehrig H., Krupinski E.A., and Furukawa T. Evaluation of a flat CRT monitor for use in radiology. J Digit Imaging 14 (2001) 142-148
22. Kotter E., Bley T.A., Saueressig U., et al. Comparison of the detectability of high- and low-contrast details on a TFT screen and a CRT screen designed for radiologic diagnosis. Invest Radiol 38 (2003) 719-724
23. Hwang S.A., Seo J.B., Choi B.K., et al. Liquid-crystal display monitors and cathode-ray tube monitors: a comparison of observer performance in the detection of small solitary pulmonary nodules. Korean J Radiol 4 (2003) 153-156
24. Partan G., Mayrhofer R., Urban M., Wassipaul M., Pichler L., and Hruby W. Diagnostic performance of liquid crystal and cathode-ray-tube monitors in brain computed tomography. Eur Radiol 13 (2003) 2397-2401
25. Balassy C., Prokop M., Weber M., Sailer J., Herold C.J., and Schaefer-Prokop C. Flat-panel display (LCD) versus high-resolution gray-scale display (CRT) for chest radiography: an observer preference study. Am J Roentgenol 184 (2005) 752-756
26. Park C.M., Lee H.J., Goo J.M., et al. Comparison of observer performance on soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs: high resolution liquid-crystal display monitors versus cathode-ray tube monitors. Eur J Radiol 66 (2008) 13-18
27. Fukushima H., Ikeda M., Ishigaki T., Usami H., and Shimamoto K. Influence of liquid crystal display monitors on observer performance for detection of diffuse pulmonary disease on chest radiographs. Radiat Med 25 (2007) 211-217
28. Buls N., Shabana W., Verbeek P., Pevenage P., and De Mey J. Influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Br J Radiol 80 (2007) 738-743
29. Blume H.R., Steven P.M., Cobb M.E., et al. Characterization of high-resolution liquid crystal displays for medical images. Proc SPIE 4323-07 (2002) 271-292