Comparison of Detectability for the New Image Processing and Conventional Image Processing by ROC Analysis: A Phantom Study of Chest Radiography

Kiriki, Masato; Osaki, Takao; Nakagawa, Hideo; Nakamura, Mitsuru; Fujikawa, Keita; Nakamura, Kenji; Kikuchi, Katsuko; Hama, Yasuhiko; Hagiwara, Yu; Kotoura, Noriko

doi:10.6009/jjrt.2020_jsrt_76.2.203

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, it might not be generalized enough for other radiologists. The familiarity of a particular machine might affect reading ability [ 16 ] since different machines use different proprietary image processing algorithms and might be different from the reader's background.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Image Quality Evaluation of a Digital Radiography System Made in Thailand

Techavipoo

Sinsuebphon

Prompalit

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) in Thailand researched and prototyped digital radiography systems under the brand name BodiiRay aiming for sustainable development and affordability of medical imaging technology. The image restoration and enhancement were implemented for the systems. Purpose. The image quality of the systems was evaluated using images from phantoms and from healthy volunteers. Methods. The survey phantom images from BodiiRay and other two commercial systems using the exposure settings for the chest, the abdomen, and the extremity were evaluated by three experience observers in terms of the high-contrast image resolution, the low-contrast image detectability, and the grayscale differentiation. The volunteer images of the chests, the abdomens, and the extremities from BodiiRay were evaluated by three specialized radiologists based on visual grading on 5-point scaled questionnaires for the anatomy visibility, the image quality satisfaction, and the diagnosis confidence in using the images. Results. BodiiRay phantom results were similar to those from the commercial systems. The overall performance averaged across the exposure settings showed that BodiiRay was slightly better than Fujifilm FDR Go in the low-contrast detectability ( p = 0.033 ) and in the grayscale differentiation ( p = 0.004 ). It was also slightly better than Siemens YSIO Max in the high-contrast resolution ( p = 0.018 ). The images of chest, pelvis, and hand phantoms illustrated comparable visual quality. For volunteer images, the percentage of the images scored ≥4 ranged from 61% to 99%, 23% to 92%, and 96% to 99% for the chest, abdomen, and extremity images, respectively. The average score ranged from 3.63 to 4.46, 3.18 to 4.21, and 4.41 to 4.51 for the chest, abdomen, and extremity images, respectively. Conclusion. The phantom image results showed the comparability of these systems. The clinical evaluation showed BodiiRay images provided sufficient image qualities for digital radiography of these body parts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%