Impact of hard-copy size on observer performance in digital chest radiography.

Schaefer, C M; Prokop, Mathias; Oestmann, J W; Wiesmann, William P.; Haubitz, B.; Meschede, A; Reichelt, Stephan; Schirg, E; Stender, H. St.; Galanski, Markus

doi:10.1148/radiology.184.1.1609106

Cited by 31 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several recent articles have suggested that the small hard-copy display of CR in standard two-on-one format might be insufficient for evaluation of subtle abnormalities. 17, 18 The current study has several limitations. First, colonoscopy may not be a perfect standard, because ir has been reported that the rate of polyps missed by colonoscopy may be as high as 10% to 20%.…”

Section: Discusslonmentioning

confidence: 88%

Double-contrast barium enema study with computed radiography: assessment in detection of colorectal polyps

1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feasibility and diagnostic performance of digital radiography in gastrointestinal imaging have not been fully investigated. We performed double-contrast barium enema study with computed radiography (CR-DCBE) on a routine basis, and the efficacy of this system for detection of colorectal polyps was investigated. The files of 76 patients, who had undergone both CR-DCBE and colonoscopy, were reviewed by two observers who were blinded to the colonoscopic findings. The radiation dose of CR-DCBE was reduced to 50% of conventional film-screen system. By using colonoscopic findings as a reference, the sensitivity and positive predictive value for colorectal polyps were 66% to 71% and 32% to 41%, respectively. There was no significant interobserver difference. The use of postprocessing with gray-scale reversal and edge enhancement did not significantly improve the results. The sensitivity for polyps smaller than 1 cm was comparable with published data of conventional film-screen systems. Our preliminary results show that CR-DCBE has an acceptable sensitivity for detection of colorectal polyps. It is suggested that the use of CR is a promising approach to digital gastrointestinal radiography.

show abstract

Section: Discusslonmentioning

confidence: 88%

Double-contrast barium enema study with computed radiography: assessment in detection of colorectal polyps

1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a consequence, radiologists knew the matrix size of the images beforehand, and their evaluation inevitably went along with a potential bias. Although it is unlikely that the image format represented a limiting factor for the detectability of the lesions [15], the effect of the image size on reader performance remained open. A recently published ROC study from Ueguchi and colleagues [20] focused on the detection of subtle interstitial abnormalities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two K versus 4 K storage phosphor chest radiography: detection performance and image quality

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of matrix size (4-K versus 2-K) in digital storage phosphor chest radiographs on image quality and on the detection of CT-proven thoracic abnormalities. In 85 patients who underwent a CT of the thorax, we obtained two additional posteroanterior storage phosphor chest radiographs, one with a matrix size of 3,520x4,280 (=4-K) and the other with a matrix size of 1,760x2,140 (=2-K). Acquisition, processing and presentation parameters were identical for all radiographs. Two radiologists evaluated the presence of mediastinal, pleural, and pulmonary abnormalities on hard copies of the radiographs, applying ROC analysis. In addition, four radiologists were asked to subjectively rank differences in image quality and to assess the demarcation of anatomic landmarks comparing the images in a blinded side-by-side manner. These data were analyzed using a two-sided binomial test with a significance level of P<0.05. Both tests, the ROC analysis of the detection performance and the binomial test of the subjective quality ratings, did not reveal significant differences between the two matrix sizes. Compared to 2-K radiographs, 4-K storage phosphor chest radiographs do not provide superior detection performance or image quality when evaluated in identical hard copy formats.

show abstract

“…To date, there is only a very limited number of studies that have focused on the effects of image size and its importance for diagnostic performance. [1][2][3][4][5] Interestingly, the results of these studies are mixed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 The size of the images ranged from 15 × 19 to 35 × 43 cm. It was found that the interpretation accuracy varied depending on the type of lesion; while detection of nodules was not affected by image size, detection of lines and micronodular opacities declined with decreasing image size.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does preference influence performance when reading different sizes of cranial computed tomography?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Radiology practice is based on the implicit assumption that the preference for a particular presentation mode goes hand in hand with superior performance. The present experiment tests this assumption in what pertains to image size. Forty-three radiologists were asked to identify intracranial hemorrhages on 20 cranial computed tomography scans in two image sizes, 14 × 14 and 28 × 28 cm. They were asked to indicate which size they preferred and subsequently rated each size on a continuous scale in terms of how much they liked them. The results show no correlation between the jackknife free-response receiver operating characteristic figure of merit and preference rated on a continuous scale (large image: r ¼ 0.14, p ¼ 0.38; small images: r ¼ 0.14, p ¼ 0.39). Similarly, there was no significant correlation between the time a radiologist took to read a case and preference rated on the continuous scale (large image: r ¼ −0.07, p ¼ 0.64; small images: r ¼ −0.04, p ¼ 0.80). When dividing radiologists into two groups according to their size preference, there was no significant difference in performance between groups with regard to either large or small images. The results suggest that the preference for an image size and performance with regard to it are not related.

show abstract

Impact of hard-copy size on observer performance in digital chest radiography.

Cited by 31 publications

References 0 publications

Double-contrast barium enema study with computed radiography: assessment in detection of colorectal polyps

Double-contrast barium enema study with computed radiography: assessment in detection of colorectal polyps

Two K versus 4 K storage phosphor chest radiography: detection performance and image quality

Does preference influence performance when reading different sizes of cranial computed tomography?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About