Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives

Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Academic radiology 2023-08, Vol.30 (8), p.1748-1755
Hauptverfasser: Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun), Barron, Melissa, Lewis, Sarah J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1755
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1748
container_title Academic radiology
container_volume 30
creator Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun)
Barron, Melissa
Lewis, Sarah J.
description Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the full-quality with minimal compressed JPEG and DICOM format of mammograms on a diagnostic monitor through the evaluation of radiologists and radiographers. Twelve participants including six radiologists and six radiographers participated as observers in this study. The observers viewed 60 2D digital mammography screening cases (22 cancer and 38 normal cases) in DICOM and minimal compressed JPEG formats on a 5MP diagnostic monitor. A 5-point Likert scale was provided for observers to compare the quality of mammograms between the two formats, with text anchors indicating to one image being significantly better, slightly better or of equal quality in terms of technical and diagnostic aspects. Nonparametric descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the ratings of radiologists and radiographers in different characteristics of mammograms of two image formats. The DICOM and JPEG images were statistically equivalent through ratings from radiographers in brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, no significant distortion, no significant noise, and background homogeneity in all mammograms. Similarly, most radiologists rated DICOM and JPEG images clinically and statistically equivalent with respect to difficulty of interpretation, brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, the appearance of Cooper's ligaments, visibility of subtle microcalcifications, visibility of structures at the margins of the breast. Normal cases were marginally favored by radiologists in DICOM format (ranging from 0.4% to 5.3%) while cancer cases in JPEG (ranging from 0.8% to 7.6%) received slightly higher rating. Findings showed that baseline full-quality with minimal compression JPEG was equivalent to the DICOM format of full-field digital mammograms which suggests that this type of JPEG could be used for online training and education in radiology.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.acra.2022.11.012
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2758354008</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1076633222006183</els_id><sourcerecordid>2758354008</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-a7762182087050bb521737a5246b13d442cfe38af96f1c8321e44e22591ded1f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAURiME6h99ARbISzYJvnZip4hNNXTKoI5aQbu2PPHN4FEcp3ZSKa_EU9bDlC5Z2b463yf5niz7ALQACuLzrtBN0AWjjBUABQX2JjuBWtZ5SUvxNt2pFLngnB1npzHuKIVK1PwoO-aiEhJKfpL9eYhIfEuWU9flj5Pu7DiTb6vF7ZqsnN5iJAvvBh3QkNGTte2t0103_50GjDHN19o5vw3aRWJ78uPu6posfXB6JK0P5Kc21nd-O5P7oFO8334hl-TXOJmZLIN3r4CNI9G9ObxT3fAbA7nDEAdsRvuE8X32rtVdxPOX8yx7WF7dL77nN7fXq8XlTd5wKsdcSykY1IzWklZ0s6kYSC51xUqxAW7KkjUt8lq3F6KFpuYMsCyRseoCDBpo-Vn26dA7BP84YRyVs7HBrtM9-ikqJquaVyWldULZAW2CjzFgq4aQFhRmBVTtHamd2jtSe0cKQCVHKfTxpX_aODSvkX9SEvD1AGD65ZPFoGJjsW_Q2JB2oYy3_-t_BvgBozc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2758354008</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun) ; Barron, Melissa ; Lewis, Sarah J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun) ; Barron, Melissa ; Lewis, Sarah J.</creatorcontrib><description>Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the full-quality with minimal compressed JPEG and DICOM format of mammograms on a diagnostic monitor through the evaluation of radiologists and radiographers. Twelve participants including six radiologists and six radiographers participated as observers in this study. The observers viewed 60 2D digital mammography screening cases (22 cancer and 38 normal cases) in DICOM and minimal compressed JPEG formats on a 5MP diagnostic monitor. A 5-point Likert scale was provided for observers to compare the quality of mammograms between the two formats, with text anchors indicating to one image being significantly better, slightly better or of equal quality in terms of technical and diagnostic aspects. Nonparametric descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the ratings of radiologists and radiographers in different characteristics of mammograms of two image formats. The DICOM and JPEG images were statistically equivalent through ratings from radiographers in brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, no significant distortion, no significant noise, and background homogeneity in all mammograms. Similarly, most radiologists rated DICOM and JPEG images clinically and statistically equivalent with respect to difficulty of interpretation, brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, the appearance of Cooper's ligaments, visibility of subtle microcalcifications, visibility of structures at the margins of the breast. Normal cases were marginally favored by radiologists in DICOM format (ranging from 0.4% to 5.3%) while cancer cases in JPEG (ranging from 0.8% to 7.6%) received slightly higher rating. Findings showed that baseline full-quality with minimal compression JPEG was equivalent to the DICOM format of full-field digital mammograms which suggests that this type of JPEG could be used for online training and education in radiology.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1076-6332</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-4046</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.11.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36567143</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Breast ; Data Compression - methods ; Humans ; Image quality ; Mammogram ; Mammography - methods ; Radiography ; Radiologists ; Radiology</subject><ispartof>Academic radiology, 2023-08, Vol.30 (8), p.1748-1755</ispartof><rights>2022 The Association of University Radiologists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-a7762182087050bb521737a5246b13d442cfe38af96f1c8321e44e22591ded1f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7021-6331</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36567143$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barron, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, Sarah J.</creatorcontrib><title>Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives</title><title>Academic radiology</title><addtitle>Acad Radiol</addtitle><description>Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the full-quality with minimal compressed JPEG and DICOM format of mammograms on a diagnostic monitor through the evaluation of radiologists and radiographers. Twelve participants including six radiologists and six radiographers participated as observers in this study. The observers viewed 60 2D digital mammography screening cases (22 cancer and 38 normal cases) in DICOM and minimal compressed JPEG formats on a 5MP diagnostic monitor. A 5-point Likert scale was provided for observers to compare the quality of mammograms between the two formats, with text anchors indicating to one image being significantly better, slightly better or of equal quality in terms of technical and diagnostic aspects. Nonparametric descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the ratings of radiologists and radiographers in different characteristics of mammograms of two image formats. The DICOM and JPEG images were statistically equivalent through ratings from radiographers in brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, no significant distortion, no significant noise, and background homogeneity in all mammograms. Similarly, most radiologists rated DICOM and JPEG images clinically and statistically equivalent with respect to difficulty of interpretation, brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, the appearance of Cooper's ligaments, visibility of subtle microcalcifications, visibility of structures at the margins of the breast. Normal cases were marginally favored by radiologists in DICOM format (ranging from 0.4% to 5.3%) while cancer cases in JPEG (ranging from 0.8% to 7.6%) received slightly higher rating. Findings showed that baseline full-quality with minimal compression JPEG was equivalent to the DICOM format of full-field digital mammograms which suggests that this type of JPEG could be used for online training and education in radiology.</description><subject>Breast</subject><subject>Data Compression - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image quality</subject><subject>Mammogram</subject><subject>Mammography - methods</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Radiologists</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><issn>1076-6332</issn><issn>1878-4046</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAURiME6h99ARbISzYJvnZip4hNNXTKoI5aQbu2PPHN4FEcp3ZSKa_EU9bDlC5Z2b463yf5niz7ALQACuLzrtBN0AWjjBUABQX2JjuBWtZ5SUvxNt2pFLngnB1npzHuKIVK1PwoO-aiEhJKfpL9eYhIfEuWU9flj5Pu7DiTb6vF7ZqsnN5iJAvvBh3QkNGTte2t0103_50GjDHN19o5vw3aRWJ78uPu6posfXB6JK0P5Kc21nd-O5P7oFO8334hl-TXOJmZLIN3r4CNI9G9ObxT3fAbA7nDEAdsRvuE8X32rtVdxPOX8yx7WF7dL77nN7fXq8XlTd5wKsdcSykY1IzWklZ0s6kYSC51xUqxAW7KkjUt8lq3F6KFpuYMsCyRseoCDBpo-Vn26dA7BP84YRyVs7HBrtM9-ikqJquaVyWldULZAW2CjzFgq4aQFhRmBVTtHamd2jtSe0cKQCVHKfTxpX_aODSvkX9SEvD1AGD65ZPFoGJjsW_Q2JB2oYy3_-t_BvgBozc</recordid><startdate>202308</startdate><enddate>202308</enddate><creator>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun)</creator><creator>Barron, Melissa</creator><creator>Lewis, Sarah J.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7021-6331</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202308</creationdate><title>Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives</title><author>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun) ; Barron, Melissa ; Lewis, Sarah J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-a7762182087050bb521737a5246b13d442cfe38af96f1c8321e44e22591ded1f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Breast</topic><topic>Data Compression - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image quality</topic><topic>Mammogram</topic><topic>Mammography - methods</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Radiologists</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barron, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, Sarah J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Academic radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Trieu, Phuong Dung (Yun)</au><au>Barron, Melissa</au><au>Lewis, Sarah J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives</atitle><jtitle>Academic radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Acad Radiol</addtitle><date>2023-08</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1748</spage><epage>1755</epage><pages>1748-1755</pages><issn>1076-6332</issn><eissn>1878-4046</eissn><abstract>Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the full-quality with minimal compressed JPEG and DICOM format of mammograms on a diagnostic monitor through the evaluation of radiologists and radiographers. Twelve participants including six radiologists and six radiographers participated as observers in this study. The observers viewed 60 2D digital mammography screening cases (22 cancer and 38 normal cases) in DICOM and minimal compressed JPEG formats on a 5MP diagnostic monitor. A 5-point Likert scale was provided for observers to compare the quality of mammograms between the two formats, with text anchors indicating to one image being significantly better, slightly better or of equal quality in terms of technical and diagnostic aspects. Nonparametric descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the ratings of radiologists and radiographers in different characteristics of mammograms of two image formats. The DICOM and JPEG images were statistically equivalent through ratings from radiographers in brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, no significant distortion, no significant noise, and background homogeneity in all mammograms. Similarly, most radiologists rated DICOM and JPEG images clinically and statistically equivalent with respect to difficulty of interpretation, brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, the appearance of Cooper's ligaments, visibility of subtle microcalcifications, visibility of structures at the margins of the breast. Normal cases were marginally favored by radiologists in DICOM format (ranging from 0.4% to 5.3%) while cancer cases in JPEG (ranging from 0.8% to 7.6%) received slightly higher rating. Findings showed that baseline full-quality with minimal compression JPEG was equivalent to the DICOM format of full-field digital mammograms which suggests that this type of JPEG could be used for online training and education in radiology.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36567143</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.acra.2022.11.012</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7021-6331</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1076-6332
ispartof Academic radiology, 2023-08, Vol.30 (8), p.1748-1755
issn 1076-6332
1878-4046
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2758354008
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Breast
Data Compression - methods
Humans
Image quality
Mammogram
Mammography - methods
Radiography
Radiologists
Radiology
title Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T15%3A42%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Use%20of%20Full-quality%20DICOM%20Images%20Compared%20to%20Minimally%20Compressed%20Mammograms%20in%20JPEG%20Format%20for%20Radiology%20Training:%20A%20Study%20From%20Radiologist%20and%20Radiographer%20Perspectives&rft.jtitle=Academic%20radiology&rft.au=Trieu,%20Phuong%20Dung%20(Yun)&rft.date=2023-08&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1748&rft.epage=1755&rft.pages=1748-1755&rft.issn=1076-6332&rft.eissn=1878-4046&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.acra.2022.11.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2758354008%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2758354008&rft_id=info:pmid/36567143&rft_els_id=S1076633222006183&rfr_iscdi=true