Reliability and Validity of Soft Copy Images Based on Flat-panel Detector in Pneumoconiosis Classification. Comparison with the Analog Radiographs

Academic Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 746-751

  Lee, Won Jeong ^a   Choi, Byung Soon ^a  

^a Occupational Lung Diseases Institute   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Chest radiographs; Digital radiography; Pneumoconiosis classification; Reliability; Validity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FILM CHANGER; FLAT PANEL DETECTOR; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PLEURA PLAQUE; PNEUMOCONIOSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RADIOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RELIABILITY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PNEUMOCONIOSIS; PREVALENCE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; X-RAY FILM; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 84877631486     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Wagner G.R., Attfield M.D., Parker J.E. Chest radiography in dust-exposed miners: promise and problems, potential and imperfections. Occup Med 1993, 8:127-141.
2. International Labour Organisation Guidelines for the use of ILO international classification of radiographs of pneumoconioses: Revised edition 2000 2002, International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland.
3. Sonoda M., Takano M., Miyahara J., et al. Computed radiography utilizing scanning laser stimulated luminescence. Radiology 1983, 148:833-838.
4. Fink C., Hallscheidt P.J., Noeldge G., et al. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 178:481-486.
5. Ganten M., Radeleff B., Kampschulte A., et al. Comparing image quality of flat-panel chest radiography with storage phosphor radiography and film-screen radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003, 181:171-176.
6. Garmer M., Hennigs S.P., Jäger H.J., et al. Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging diagnostic performance of a large-area flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000, 174:75-80.
7. Rong X.J., Shaw C.C., Liu X., et al. Comparison of an amorphous silicon/cesium iodide flat-panel digital chest radiography systems with screen/film and computed radiography systems: a contrast-detail phantom study. Med Phys 2001, 28:2328-2335.
8. Lee W.J., Choi B.S. Utility of digital radiography for the screening of pneumoconiosis as compared to analog radiography: radiation dose, image quality, and pneumoconiosis classification. Health Phys 2012, 103:64-69.
9. Takashima Y., Suganuma N., Sakurazawa H., et al. A flat-panel detector digital radiography and a storage phosphor computed radiography: screening for pneumoconiosis. J Occup Health 2007, 49:39-45.
10. Franzblau A., Kazerooni E.A., Sen A., et al. Comparison of digital radiographs with film radiographs for the classification of pneumoconiosis. Acad Radiol 2009, 16:669-677.
11. Laney A.S., Petsonk E.L., Wolfe A.L., et al. Comparison of storage phosphor computed radiography with conventional film-screen radiography in the recognition of pneumoconiosis. Eur Respir J 2010, 36:122-127.
12. Sen A., Lee S.Y., Gillespie B.W., et al. Comparing film and digital radiographs for reliability of pneumoconiosis classifications: a modeling approach. Acad Radiol 2010, 17:511-519.
13. Mao L., Laney A.S., Wang M.L., et al. Comparison of digital direct readout radiography with conventional film-screen radiography for the recognition of pneumoconiosis in dust-exposed Chinese workers. J Occup Health 2011, 53:320-326.
14. Larson T.C., Holiday D.B., Antao V.C., et al. Comparison of digital with film radiographs for the classification of pneumoconiotic pleural abnormalities. Acad Radiol 2012, 19:131-140.
15. Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute. Guidelines of quality assurance for pneumoconiosis. Available at: Accessed June 2, 2010. http://oshri.kosha.or.kr/board?tc=RetrieveBoardViewCmd&boardType=A&contented=208741&pageNum=1&urlCode=T1%7CY%7C404%7C371%7C%7C%7C%7C%7C/board&tabId.
16. Choi B.S., Park S.Y., Lee J.O. Current status of pneumoconiosis patients in Korea. J Korean Med Sci 2010, 25(Suppl):S13-S19.
17. Sim J., Wright C.C. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 2005, 85:257-268.
18. Obuchowski N.A. Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 2003, 229:3-8.
19. Park S.H., Goo J.M., Jo C.H. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol 2004, 5:11-18.
20. Welch L.S., Hunting K.L., Balmes J., et al. Variability in the classification of radiographs using the 1980 International Labor Organization Classification for Pneumoconioses. Chest 1998, 114:1740-1748.
21. Reger R.B., Smith C.A., Kibelstis J.A., et al. The effect of film quality and other factors on the roentgenographic categorization of coal workers' pneumoconiosis. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1972, 115:462-472.
22. Musch D.C., Landis J.R., Higgins I.T., et al. An application of kappa-type analyses to interobserver variation in classifying chest radiographs for pneumoconiosis. Stat Med 1984, 3:73-83.
23. Musch D.C., Higgins I.T., Landis J.R. Some factors influencing interobserver variation in classifying simple pneumoconiosis. Br J Ind Med 1985, 42:346-349.
24. Frumkin H., Pransky G., Cosmatos I. Radiologic detection of pleural thickening. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990, 142:1325-1330.
25. Schaefer-Prokop C., Neitzel U., Venema H.W., et al. Digital chest radiography: an update on modern technology, dose containment and control of image quality. Eur Radiol 2008, 18:1818-1830.