Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 2000
Hard-copy versus soft-copy with and without simple image manipulation for detection of pulmonary nodules and masses.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kosuda S, Kaji T, Kobayashi H, Watanabe M, Iwasaki Y, Kusano S
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare interpretation performance on soft-copy presentations, with and without simple image manipulation, and on unmodified hard-copy presentations with regard to detection of pulmonary nodules and masses.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty chest digital radiograph combinations of patients with a total of 60 nodules, 32 of which were 2.0 cm in diameter, were selected for the study. Three readers evaluated three separate image formats: unmodified hard- and soft-copies, and soft-copies with simple image manipulation of lung and mediastinum window settings, and zooming. The screen display was 1600 x 1200 pixels with 8 bits/pixel.
RESULTS: The sensitivity, accuracy, detectability, and Az value of the soft-copy systems were clearly inferior to hard-copy evaluation. The mean Az values were 0.921 for unmodified hard-copy, 0.820 for image-manipulated soft-copy, and 0.781 for unmodified soft-copy.
CONCLUSION: Soft-copy interpretations were not as sensitive in detecting pulmonary nodules and masses as hard-copy evaluation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty chest digital radiograph combinations of patients with a total of 60 nodules, 32 of which were 2.0 cm in diameter, were selected for the study. Three readers evaluated three separate image formats: unmodified hard- and soft-copies, and soft-copies with simple image manipulation of lung and mediastinum window settings, and zooming. The screen display was 1600 x 1200 pixels with 8 bits/pixel.
RESULTS: The sensitivity, accuracy, detectability, and Az value of the soft-copy systems were clearly inferior to hard-copy evaluation. The mean Az values were 0.921 for unmodified hard-copy, 0.820 for image-manipulated soft-copy, and 0.781 for unmodified soft-copy.
CONCLUSION: Soft-copy interpretations were not as sensitive in detecting pulmonary nodules and masses as hard-copy evaluation.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultComputer SystemsData DisplayFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLikelihood FunctionsLung DiseasesMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationROC CurveRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiography, ThoracicSensitivity and SpecificitySolitary Pulmonary NoduleTomography, X-Ray ComputedX-Ray Intensifying Screens