Variations in performance of LCDs are still evident after DICOM gray-scale standard display calibration

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 195, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 181-187

  Lowe, Joanna M ^a   Brennan, Patrick C ^b   Evanoff, Michael G ^c   McEntee, Mark F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c American Board of Radiology   (United States)

Author keywords

Gray scale standard display function; Just noticeable differences; Liquid crystal display; Physical; Psychophysical

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BRIGHTNESS; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTRAST; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS IN MEDICINE; GLARE; LIQUID CRYSTAL; LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPAY; LUMINANCE; NOISE; PHOTOMETER; PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

CALIBRATION; COMPUTER TERMINALS; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; DATA DISPLAY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; LIGHTING; LIQUID CRYSTALS; LUMINESCENCE; OPTICS AND PHOTONICS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 77954722302     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2851     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Scharitzer M, Prokop M, Weber M, Fuchsjager M, Oschatz E, Schaefer-Prokop C. Detectability of catheters on bedside chest radiographs: comparison between liquid crystal display and high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitors. Radiology 2005; 234:611-616 (Pubitemid 40139938)
2. Wolbarst A, Hendee W. Evolving and experimental technologies in medical imaging. Radiology 2006; 238:16-39 (Pubitemid 43010578)
3. Oschatz E, Prokop M, Scharitzer M, Weber M, Balassy C, Schaefer-Prokop C. Comparison of liquid crystal versus cathode ray tube display for the detection of simulated chest lesions. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1472-1476
4. Pavlicek W, Owen JM, Peter MB. Active matrix liquid crystal displays for clinical imaging: comparison with cathode ray tubes. J Digit Imaging 2000; 13:155-161
5. Roehrig H, Krupinski EA, Fan J, et al. LCDs versus CRTs: a comparative performance evaluation. deckard.duhs.duke.edu/~asc14/pubs/LCD-CRT-Corr.pdf. Accessed October 2, 2009
6. Evanoff MG, Roehrig H, Giffords R, et al. Calibration of medium-resolution monochrome cathode ray tube displays for the purpose of board examinations. J Digit Imaging 2001; 14[2 suppl 1]: 27-33
7. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA PS3.14-2000: Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Part 14: grayscale standard display function. Reston, VA: NEMA, 2000
8. Price RC, Le Masurier SB. Longitudinal changes in extended roles in radiography: a new perspective. Radiography 2007; 13:18-29
9. White P, Lee SWY, Wong CWY, Lee AKW, Cheung DN. Role development for therapeutic radiographers in the public hospitals in Hong Kong. J Radiother Pract 2004; 4:66-77
10. White P, McKay JC. Guidelines and legal requirements which inform role expansion in radiography. Radiography 2002; 8:71-78
11. Nightingale J, Hogg P. Clinical practice at an advanced level: an introduction. Radiography 2003; 9:77-83
12. Bryan S, Weatherburn GC, Watkins JR, Buxton MJ. The benefits of hospital-wide picture archiving and communication systems: a survey of clinical users of radiology services. Br J Radiol 1999; 72:469-478
13. Deutsches Institut für Normung. DIN 6868-57: Image quality assurance in x-ray diagnosis. Part 57. Acceptance testing for image display devices. www.din.de/cmd?workflowname=dinSearch&languageid=en. Published 1999. Accessed March 30, 2010
14. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems, American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18 Imaging Informatics Subcommittee, AAPM On-Line Report No. 03; 2005. deckard.mc.duke.edu/~samei/tg18. Accessed March 22, 2010
15. [No authors listed]. JIS Z 4752-2-5: quality maintenance evaluation and routine testing methods in medical imaging departments. Part 2-5. Constancy tests: imaging display devices [in Japanese]. www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/syozoku/c- yakumu/tuti3/20-1a-14z-4.pdf. Published 2001. Accessed March 22, 2010
16. [No authors listed]. IEC 1223-2-5: evaluation and routine testing in medical departments. Part 2-5. Constancy tests: imaging display devices. webstore.iec.ch/preview/info-iec61223-2-5%7Bed1.0%Db.img.pdf. Published 1994. Accessed March 30, 2010
17. Hemminger BM, Johnston RE, Rolland JR, Mullert KE. Perceptual linearization of video display monitors for medical image presentation. Proc SPIE 1994; 2164:222-240
18. Seto E, Ursani A, Cafazzo JA, Rossos PG, Easty AC. Image quality assurance of soft copy display systems. J Digit Imaging 2005; 18:280-286 (Pubitemid 41609326)
19. Mertelmeier T, Scharl P. Acceptance testing for soft copy displays. Proc SPIE 2001; 4319:525-535
20. Blume H, Ho AMK, Stevens F, Steven PM. Practical aspects of grayscale calibration of display systems: medical imaging. Proc SPIE 2001; 4323:28-41
21. Jervis SE, Brettle DS. A practical approach to softcopy display consistency for PC-based review workstations. Br J Radiol 2003; 76:648-652
22. Crespi A, Bonsignore F, Paruccini N, Macchi I. Grayscale calibration and quality assurance of diagnostic monitors in a PACS system. Radiol Med 2006; 111:863-875
23. Crespi A, Bonsignore F. Paruccini N, Ponti ED, Macchi I. Acceptance tests of diagnostic displays in a PACS system according to AAPM TG18. Phys Med 2006; 22:17-24 (Pubitemid 44351889)
24. Jung H, Kim H, Kang W, et al. Assessment of flat panel LCD primary class display performance based on AAPM TG 18 acceptance protocol. Med Phys 2004; 31:2155-2164
25. Brennan PC, McEntee M, Evanoff M, Phillips P, O'Connor WT, Manning DJ. Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. AJR 2007; 188:520; [web] W177-W180
26. Flynn MJ, Kanicki J, Badano A, Eyler WR. High fidelity electronic display of digital radiographs. RadioGraphics 1999; 19:1653-1669
27. Barten PGJ. Contrast sensitivity of the human eye and its effects on image quality. Bellingham, WA: SPIE Press, 1999
28. Krupinski EA, Lubin J, Roehrig H, Johnson J, Nafziger J. Using a human visual system model to optimize soft-copy mammography display: influence of veiling glare. Acad Radiol 2006; 13:289-295