Comparison of 3MP medical‐grade to 1MP office‐grade LCD monitors in mammographic diagnostic and perceptual performance

Abstract

There were no statistically and clinically significant differences between 3MP and 1MP monitors in mammographic diagnostic and perceptual performance. Comparable performance may be due to compensatory behaviour by readers.

Comparison of organic electroluminescence and liquid crystal displays for clinical utility in orthopedic endoscopic surgery

“…Few reports have compared the utility of monitors for medical use. Some studies have compared LCD or an LCD versus cathode‐ray tube monitor for lesion detection in mammography . Monitor comparisons for lesion diagnosis in cerebral infarction and respiratory tract disease have also been reported .…”

A systematic review of viewing conditions and monitor specifications in mammography

“…Many technical factors contribute to image quality and there has been a heavy focus on the technology used to produce full field digital mammograms (FFDM). 2 However, monitor specification and environmental conditions can be dominant influences in overall image quality and there is currently no comprehensive review of the current standards in mammography available in the literature. 1 The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate all scientific evidence on the recommended monitor specifications and viewing condition for mammography image review in both acquisition and reporting rooms.…”

Cancer on a mammogram is not memorable: Readers remember their recalls and not cancers

“…The experimental work took place at St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, and the program was supported by research grants and in‐kind donations from the LEW Carty Charitable Foundation, the University of Melbourne, The Medical Defence Association of Victoria (now Avant Ltd), RANZCR, SECTRA Australia, Medilink Australia, Toshiba Australia and Kestral Australia. Previous work of the program had been published in 2010 and 2011 . The program was led by Alexander Pitman, and the co‐investigators of the program are co‐authors of the publications.…”

“…Previous work of the program had been published in 2010 and 2011. [1][2][3][4] The program was led by Alexander Pitman, and the co-investigators of the program are co-authors of the publications.…”