Prediction of human observer performance in a 2-alternative forced choice low-contrast detection task using channelized Hotelling observer: Impact of radiation dose and reconstruction algorithms

Medical Physics

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2013, Pages

  Yu, Lifeng ^a   Leng, Shuai ^a   Chen, Lingyun ^a   Kofler, James M ^a   Carter, Rickey E ^a   McCollough, Cynthia H ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

computed tomography (CT); image quality; iterative reconstruction (IR); model observer; radiation dose

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING; DOSIMETRY; FORECASTING; IMAGE QUALITY; ITERATIVE METHODS; PHANTOMS;

CHANNELIZED HOTELLING OBSERVERS; FILTERED BACK-PROJECTION; HUMAN-OBSERVER PERFORMANCE; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; MEAN ABSOLUTE DIFFERENCES; MODEL OBSERVER; PEARSONS PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS; RECONSTRUCTION ALGORITHMS;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FORCED CHOICE METHOD; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DECISION MAKING; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ALGORITHMS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84876160428     PISSN: 00942405     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1118/1.4794498     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. National Council on Radiation Protection Measurements (NCRP), Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States., Report No. 160, 2009.
2. D. J. Brenner and E. J. Hall, Computed tomography-An increasing source of radiation exposure., N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 2277-2284 (2007). 10.1056/NEJMra072149
3. AAPM CT Dose Summit, Scan Parameter Optimization., see http://www.aapm.org/meetings/2010CTS/default.asp. (2010).
4. W. R. Hendee, G. J. Becker, J. P. Borgstede, J. Bosma, W. J. Casarella, B. A. Erickson, C. D. Maynard, J. H. Thrall, and P. E. Wallner, Addressing overutilization in medical imaging., Radiology 257, 240-245 (2010). 10.1148/radiol.10100063
5. S. Singh, M. K. Kalra, M. A. Moore, R. Shailam, B. Liu, T. L. Toth, E. Grant, and S. J. Westra, Dose reduction and compliance with pediatric CT protocols adapted to patient size, clinical indication, and number of prior studies., Radiology 252, 200-208 (2009). 10.1148/radiol.2521081554
6. B. Karmazyn, D. P. Frush, K. E. Applegate, C. Maxfield, M. D. Cohen, and R. P. Jones, CT with a computer-simulated dose reduction technique for detection of pediatric nephroureterolithiasis: Comparison of standard and reduced radiation doses., Am. J. Roentgenol. 192, 143-149 (2009). 10.2214/AJR.08.1391
7. L. S. Guimaraes, J. G. Fletcher, W. S. Harmsen, L. Yu, H. Siddiki, Z. Melton, J. E. Huprich, D. Hough, R. Hartman, and C. H. McCollough, Appropriate patient selection at abdominal dual-energy CT using 80 kV: Relationship between patient size, image noise, and image quality., Radiology 257, 732-742 (2010). 10.1148/radiol.10092016
8. ACR CT Accreditation, CT Accreditation Program Requirements., see http://www.acr.org/accreditation/computed/ct-reqs.aspx (2010).
9. J. M. Boone, Determination of the presampled MTF in computed tomography., Med. Phys. 28, 356-360 (2001). 10.1118/1.1350438
10. J. Hsieh, Computed Tomography: Principles, Design, Artifacts, and Recent Advances (SPIE Press, Bellingham, Washington, 2006).
11. J. H. Siewerdsen, I. A. Cunningham, and D. A. Jaffray, A framework for noise-power spectrum analysis of multidimensional images., Med. Phys. 29, 2655-2671 (2002). 10.1118/1.1513158
12. J. D. Evans, D. G. Politte, B. R. Whiting, J. A. O'Sullian, and J. F. Williamson, Effect of contrast magnitude and resolution metric on noise-resolution tradeoffs in x-ray CT imaging: A comparison of non-quadratic penalized alternating minimization and filtered backprojection algorithms., Proc. SPIE 7961, 79612C (2011). 10.1117/12.876701
13. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Medical imaging-The assessment of image quality., ICRU Report No. 54 (1995).
14. H. H. Barrett, J. Yao, J. P. Rolland, and K. J. Myers, Model observers for assessment of image quality., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 90, 9758-9765 (1993). 10.1073/pnas.90.21.9758
15. K. J. Myers and H. H. Barrett, Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2447-2457 (1987). 10.1364/JOSAA.4.002447
16. K. J. Myers, H. H. Barrett, M. C. Borgstrom, D. D. Patton, and G. W. Seeley, Effect of noise correlation on detectability of disk signals in medical imaging., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 2, 1752-1759 (1985). 10.1364/JOSAA.2.001752
17. J. P. Rolland and H. H. Barrett, Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 9, 649-658 (1992). 10.1364/JOSAA.9.000649
18. J. Yao and H. H. Barrett, Predicting human performance by a channelized Hotelling observer model., Proc. SPIE 1768, 161-168 (1992). 10.1117/12.130899
19. H. R. Wilson and J. R. Bergen, A four mechanism model for threshold spatial vision., Vision Res. 19, 19-32 (1979). 10.1016/0042-6989(79)90117-2
20. M. P. Eckstein and J. S. Whiting, Lesion detection in structured noise., Acad. Radiol. 2, 249-253 (1995). 10.1016/S1076-6332(05)80174-6
21. H. H. Barrett, C. K. Abbey, B. Gallas, and M. P. Eckstein, Stabilized estimates of Hotelling observer detection performance in patient structured noise., Proc. SPIE 3340 (1998). 10.1117/12.306181
22. M. P. Eckstein, C. K. Abbey, and F. O. Bochud, Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. IV. Figures of merit for model performance in multiple-alternative forced-choice detection tasks with correlated responses., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 17, 206-217 (2000). 10.1364/JOSAA.17. 000206
23. A. S. Chawla, E. Sarnei, R. Saunders, C. Abbey, and D. Delong, Effect of dose reduction on the detection of mammographic lesions: A mathematical observer model analysis., Med. Phys. 34, 3385-3398 (2007). 10.1118/1.2756607
24. S. Park, H. H. Barrett, E. Clarkson, M. A. Kupinski, and K. J. Myers, Channelized-ideal observer using Laguerre-Gauss channels in detection tasks involving non-Gaussian distributed lumpy backgrounds and a Gaussian signal., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis 24, B136-B150 (2007). 10.1364/JOSAA.24. 00B136
25. R. F. Wagner, D. G. Brown, and M. S. Pastel, Application of information theory to the assessment of computed tomography., Med. Phys. 6, 83-94 (1979). 10.1118/1.594559
26. A. E. Burgess, Statistically defined backgrounds: Performance of a modified nonprewhitening observer model., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 11, 1237-1242 (1994). 10.1364/JOSAA.11.001237
27. H. C. Gifford, M. A. King, P. H. Pretorius, and R. G. Wells, A comparison of human and model observers in multislice LROC studies., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 24, 160-169 (2005). 10.1109/TMI.2004.839362
28. P. Khurd and G. Gindi, Decision strategies that maximize the area under the LROC curve., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 24, 1626-1636 (2005). 10.1109/TMI.2005.859210
29. B. Liu, L. Zhou, S. Kulkarni, and G. Gindi, The efficiency of the human observer for lesion detection and localization in emission tomography., Phys. Med. Biol. 54, 2651-2666 (2009). 10.1088/0031-9155/54/9/004
30. Y. Zhang, B. T. Pham, and M. P. Eckstein, Automated optimization of JPEG 2000 encoder options based on model observer performance for detecting variable signals in x-ray coronary angiograms., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 23, 459-474 (2004). 10.1109/TMI.2004.824153
31. A. Yendiki and J. Fessler, Analysis of observer performance in known-location tasks for tomographic image reconstruction., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 25, 28-41 (2006). 10.1109/TMI.2005.859714
32. G. J. Gang, D. J. Tward, J. Lee, and J. H. Siewerdsen, Anatomical background and generalized detectability in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT., Med. Phys. 37, 1948-1965 (2010). 10.1118/1.3352586
33. S. Park, R. Jennings, H. Liu, A. Badano, and K. J. Myers, A statistical, task-based evaluation method for three-dimensional x-ray breast imaging systems using variable-background phantoms., Med. Phys. 37, 6253-6270 (2010). 10.1118/1.3488910
34. H. C. Gifford, M. A. King, D. J. de Vries, and E. J. Soares, Channelized hotelling and human observer correlation for lesion detection in hepatic SPECT imaging., J. Nucl. Med. 41, 514-521 (2000).
35. J. D. Sain and H. H. Barrett, Performance evaluation of a modular gamma camera using a detectability index., J. Nucl. Med. 44, 58-66 (2003).
36. H. H. Barrett, L. R. Furenlid, M. Freed, J. Y. Hesterman, M. A. Kupinski, E. Clarkson, and M. K. Whitaker, Adaptive SPECT., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 27, 775-788 (2008). 10.1109/TMI.2007.913241
37. A. E. Burgess, F. L. Jacobson, and P. F. Judy, Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise., Med. Phys. 28, 419-437 (2001). 10.1118/1.1355308
38. L. Y. Chen and H. H. Barrett, Task-based lens design with application to digital mammography., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 22, 148-167 (2005). 10.1364/JOSAA.22.000148
39. M. L. Hill, J. G. Mainprize, and M. J. Yaffe, An observer model for lesion detectability in contrast-enhanced digital mammography., Digital Mammography 6136, 720-727 (2010). 10.1007/978-3-642-13666-5
40. S. Richard and J. H. Siewerdsen, Comparison of model and human observer performance for detection and discrimination tasks using dual-energy x-ray images., Med. Phys. 35, 5043-5053 (2008). 10.1118/1.2988161
41. I. Reiser and R. M. Nishikawa, Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: Effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise., Med. Phys. 37, 1591-1600 (2010). 10.1118/1.3357288
42. S. Richard and E. Samei, Quantitative imaging in breast tomosynthesis and CT: Comparison of detection and estimation task performance., Med. Phys. 37, 2627-2637 (2010). 10.1118/1.3429025
43. G. J. Gang, W. Zbijewski, J. Webster Stayman, and J. H. Siewerdsen, Cascaded systems analysis of noise and detectability in dual-energy cone-beam CT., Med. Phys. 39, 5145-5156 (2012). 10.1118/1.4736420
44. M. D. Tisdall and M. S. Atkins, Using human and model performance to compare MRI reconstructions., IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 25, 1510-1517 (2006). 10.1109/TMI.2006.881374
45. P. F. Judy, R. G. Swensson, and M. Szulc, Lesion detection and signal-to-noise ratio in CT images., Med. Phys. 8, 13-23 (1981). 10.1118/1.594903
46. K. L. Boedeker and M. F. McNitt-Gray, Application of the noise power spectrum in modern diagnostic MDCT: Part II. Noise power spectra and signal to noise., Phys. Med. Biol. 52, 4047-4061 (2007). 10.1088/0031-9155/52/14/003
47. A. Wunderlich and F. Noo, Image covariance and lesion detectability in direct fan-beam x-ray computed tomography., Phys. Med. Biol. 53, 2471-2493 (2008). 10.1088/0031-9155/53/10/002
48. S. Richard, G. Yadava, X. Li, and E. Samei, Predictive models for observer performance in CT: Applications in protocol optimization., Proc. SPIE 7961, 79610H (2011). 10.1117/12.877069
49. C. H. McCollough, G. H. Chen, W. Kalender, S. Leng, E. Samei, K. Taguchi, G. Wang, L. F. Yu, and R. I. Pettigrew, Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: Report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT., Radiology 264, 567-580 (2012). 10.1148/radiol.12112265
50. T. Flohr, K. Stierstorfer, R. Raupach, S. Ulzheimer, and H. Bruder, Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot., Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 176, 1803-1810 (2004). 10.1055/s-2004-813717
51. K. Stierstorfer, A. Rauscher, J. Boese, H. Bruder, S. Schaller, and T. Flohr, Weighted FBP-A simple approximate 3D FBP algorithm for multislice spiral CT with good dose usage for arbitrary pitch., Phys. Med. Biol. 49, 2209-2218 (2004). 10.1088/0031-9155/49/11/007
52. J. A. Christner, K. Stierstorfer, A. N. Primak, C. D. Eusemann, T. G. Flohr, and C. H. McCollough, Evaluation of z-axis resolution and image noise for nonconstant velocity spiral CT data reconstructed using a weighted 3D filtered backprojection (WFBP) reconstruction algorithm., Med. Phys. 37, 897-906 (2010). 10.1118/1.3271110
53. ACR Electronic Practice Guideline, ACR Technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging., see http://gm.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/ quality-safety/guidelines/med-phys/electronic-practice.aspx (2007).
54. J. N. K. Rao and A. J. Scott, A simple method for the analysis of clustered binary data., Biometrics 48, 577-585 (1992). 10.2307/2532311
55. Y. Zhang, B. T. Pham, and M. P. Eckstein, Evaluation of internal noise methods for Hotelling observer models., Med. Phys. 34, 3312-3322 (2007). 10.1118/1.2756603
56. H. H. Barrett and K. J. Myers, Foundations of Image Science (John Wileys Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2004).
57. C. K. Abbey and F. O. Bochud, Modeling visual detection tasks in correlated image noise with linear model observers., Handbook of Medical Imaging, Volume 1, Physics and Psychophysics (SPIE, Bellingham, Washington, 2000).
58. L. L. Zhou and G. Gindi, Collimator optimization in SPECT based on a joint detection and localization task., Phys. Med. Biol. 54, 4423-4437 (2009). 10.1088/0031-9155/54/14/005
59. S. Leng, L. Yu, L. Chen, J. C. Ramirez-Giraldo, and C. H. McCollough, Correlation between model observer and human observer performance in CT imaging when lesion location is uncertain., Proc. SPIE 8313, 83131M (2012). 10.1117/12.912126
60. K. A. Fetterly, H. R. Blume, M. J. Flynn, and E. Samei, Introduction to grayscale calibration and related aspects of medical imaging grade liquid crystal displays., J. Digit Imaging 21, 193-207 (2008). 10.1007/s10278-007-9022- y