Journal of digital imaging · 2007
A comparative study of conventional mammography film interpretations with soft copy readings of the same examinations.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Gitlin Joseph N, Narayan Anand K, Mitchell Chad A, Akmal Ali M, Eisner David J, Peterson Lindsy M, Nie Daisy, McClintock Tyler R
Аннотация
An acceptable mammography film digitizer must provide high-quality images at a level of diagnostic accuracy comparable to reading conventional film examinations. The purpose of this study was to determine if there are significant differences between the interpretations of conventional film-screen mammography examinations and soft copy readings of the images produced by a mammography film digitizer. Eight radiologists interpreted 120 mammography examinations, half as original films and the other half as digital images on a soft copy work station. No radiologist read the same examination twice. The interpretations were recorded in accordance with the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System and included other variables such as perceived image quality and diagnostic difficulty and confidence. The results provide support for the hypothesis that there are no significant differences between the interpretations of conventional film-screen mammography examinations and soft copy examinations produced by a mammography film digitizer.