Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds

While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the de...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of digital imaging 2012-10, Vol.25 (5), p.662-669
Hauptverfasser: Leong, David L., Rainford, Louise, Haygood, Tamara Miner, Whitman, Gary J., Tchou, Philip M., Geiser, William R., Carkaci, Selin, Brennan, Patrick C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 669
container_issue 5
container_start_page 662
container_title Journal of digital imaging
container_volume 25
creator Leong, David L.
Rainford, Louise
Haygood, Tamara Miner
Whitman, Gary J.
Tchou, Philip M.
Geiser, William R.
Carkaci, Selin
Brennan, Patrick C.
description While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the detection threshold and whether the median background intensity shift has been minimized by GSDF remains unknown. We set out to determine if the median background affected the detection of a low-contrast object in a clustered lumpy background, which simulated a mammography image, and to define the contrast detection threshold for these complex images. Clustered lumpy background images were created of different median intensities and disks of varying contrasts were inserted. A reader study was performed with 17 readers of varying skill level who scored with a five-point confidence scale whether a disk was present. The results were analyzed using reader operating characteristic (ROC) methodology. Contingency tables were used to determine the contrast detection threshold. No statistically significant difference was seen in the area under the ROC curve across all of the backgrounds. Contrast detection fell below 50 % between +3 and +2 gray levels. Our work supports the conclusion that Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine GSDF calibrated monitors do perceptually linearize detection performance across shifts in median background intensity. The contrast detection threshold was determined to be +3 gray levels above the background for an object of 1° visual angle.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10278-012-9478-2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3447097</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1671351282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-5e4a2739014c27ca24afef0e39e98aeb310ad4d78cccc5723c2164ae589cbf163</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1OAyEURonR2Fp9ADdmEjduRrnAFNiYaGtrE00X_sQdoZSpU6dDhY7Rt5emtakmsoHknvvB5SB0DPgcMOYXATDhIsVAUsnigeygJrRBpJzwl13UxELyFISQDXQQwhRj4Bln-6hBSEYzkLSJ4Nn6Ii-MXhSuSlyedAed4X3Sf-j2kqJKOm42L-1ncq3N28S7uhqHQ7SX6zLYo_XeQk-9m8fObXo37A86V3epyTBdpJllmnAqMTBDuNGE6dzm2FJppdB2RAHrMRtzYeLKOKGGQJtpmwlpRjm0aQtdrnLn9Whmx8ZWC69LNffFTPsv5XShfleq4lVN3IeijHEseQw4Wwd4917bsFCzIhhblrqyrg4K2hziLxBBInr6B5262ldxPAWYAVBM2ZKCFWW8C8HbfPMYwGopRK2EqChELYWoZc_J9hSbjh8DESArIMRSNbF---r_Ur8BUGKUqQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1041130342</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Leong, David L. ; Rainford, Louise ; Haygood, Tamara Miner ; Whitman, Gary J. ; Tchou, Philip M. ; Geiser, William R. ; Carkaci, Selin ; Brennan, Patrick C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Leong, David L. ; Rainford, Louise ; Haygood, Tamara Miner ; Whitman, Gary J. ; Tchou, Philip M. ; Geiser, William R. ; Carkaci, Selin ; Brennan, Patrick C.</creatorcontrib><description>While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the detection threshold and whether the median background intensity shift has been minimized by GSDF remains unknown. We set out to determine if the median background affected the detection of a low-contrast object in a clustered lumpy background, which simulated a mammography image, and to define the contrast detection threshold for these complex images. Clustered lumpy background images were created of different median intensities and disks of varying contrasts were inserted. A reader study was performed with 17 readers of varying skill level who scored with a five-point confidence scale whether a disk was present. The results were analyzed using reader operating characteristic (ROC) methodology. Contingency tables were used to determine the contrast detection threshold. No statistically significant difference was seen in the area under the ROC curve across all of the backgrounds. Contrast detection fell below 50 % between +3 and +2 gray levels. Our work supports the conclusion that Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine GSDF calibrated monitors do perceptually linearize detection performance across shifts in median background intensity. The contrast detection threshold was determined to be +3 gray levels above the background for an object of 1° visual angle.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0897-1889</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1618-727X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10278-012-9478-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22535193</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Area Under Curve ; Calibration ; Cohort Studies ; Confidence Intervals ; Contrast Sensitivity ; Data Display ; Digital imaging ; Disks ; False Positive Reactions ; Female ; Humans ; Image contrast ; Imaging ; Liquid Crystals ; Mammography - methods ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Monitors ; Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation ; Radiology ; Radiology Information Systems - standards ; Readers ; Reference Standards ; ROC Curve ; Thresholds</subject><ispartof>Journal of digital imaging, 2012-10, Vol.25 (5), p.662-669</ispartof><rights>Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-5e4a2739014c27ca24afef0e39e98aeb310ad4d78cccc5723c2164ae589cbf163</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-5e4a2739014c27ca24afef0e39e98aeb310ad4d78cccc5723c2164ae589cbf163</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3447097/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3447097/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27922,27923,53789,53791</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22535193$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leong, David L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rainford, Louise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haygood, Tamara Miner</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitman, Gary J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tchou, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geiser, William R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carkaci, Selin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brennan, Patrick C.</creatorcontrib><title>Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds</title><title>Journal of digital imaging</title><addtitle>J Digit Imaging</addtitle><addtitle>J Digit Imaging</addtitle><description>While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the detection threshold and whether the median background intensity shift has been minimized by GSDF remains unknown. We set out to determine if the median background affected the detection of a low-contrast object in a clustered lumpy background, which simulated a mammography image, and to define the contrast detection threshold for these complex images. Clustered lumpy background images were created of different median intensities and disks of varying contrasts were inserted. A reader study was performed with 17 readers of varying skill level who scored with a five-point confidence scale whether a disk was present. The results were analyzed using reader operating characteristic (ROC) methodology. Contingency tables were used to determine the contrast detection threshold. No statistically significant difference was seen in the area under the ROC curve across all of the backgrounds. Contrast detection fell below 50 % between +3 and +2 gray levels. Our work supports the conclusion that Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine GSDF calibrated monitors do perceptually linearize detection performance across shifts in median background intensity. The contrast detection threshold was determined to be +3 gray levels above the background for an object of 1° visual angle.</description><subject>Area Under Curve</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Confidence Intervals</subject><subject>Contrast Sensitivity</subject><subject>Data Display</subject><subject>Digital imaging</subject><subject>Disks</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image contrast</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Liquid Crystals</subject><subject>Mammography - methods</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Monitors</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Radiology Information Systems - standards</subject><subject>Readers</subject><subject>Reference Standards</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Thresholds</subject><issn>0897-1889</issn><issn>1618-727X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1OAyEURonR2Fp9ADdmEjduRrnAFNiYaGtrE00X_sQdoZSpU6dDhY7Rt5emtakmsoHknvvB5SB0DPgcMOYXATDhIsVAUsnigeygJrRBpJzwl13UxELyFISQDXQQwhRj4Bln-6hBSEYzkLSJ4Nn6Ii-MXhSuSlyedAed4X3Sf-j2kqJKOm42L-1ncq3N28S7uhqHQ7SX6zLYo_XeQk-9m8fObXo37A86V3epyTBdpJllmnAqMTBDuNGE6dzm2FJppdB2RAHrMRtzYeLKOKGGQJtpmwlpRjm0aQtdrnLn9Whmx8ZWC69LNffFTPsv5XShfleq4lVN3IeijHEseQw4Wwd4917bsFCzIhhblrqyrg4K2hziLxBBInr6B5262ldxPAWYAVBM2ZKCFWW8C8HbfPMYwGopRK2EqChELYWoZc_J9hSbjh8DESArIMRSNbF---r_Ur8BUGKUqQ</recordid><startdate>20121001</startdate><enddate>20121001</enddate><creator>Leong, David L.</creator><creator>Rainford, Louise</creator><creator>Haygood, Tamara Miner</creator><creator>Whitman, Gary J.</creator><creator>Tchou, Philip M.</creator><creator>Geiser, William R.</creator><creator>Carkaci, Selin</creator><creator>Brennan, Patrick C.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</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>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20121001</creationdate><title>Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds</title><author>Leong, David L. ; Rainford, Louise ; Haygood, Tamara Miner ; Whitman, Gary J. ; Tchou, Philip M. ; Geiser, William R. ; Carkaci, Selin ; Brennan, Patrick C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-5e4a2739014c27ca24afef0e39e98aeb310ad4d78cccc5723c2164ae589cbf163</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Area Under Curve</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Confidence Intervals</topic><topic>Contrast Sensitivity</topic><topic>Data Display</topic><topic>Digital imaging</topic><topic>Disks</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image contrast</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Liquid Crystals</topic><topic>Mammography - methods</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Monitors</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Radiology Information Systems - standards</topic><topic>Readers</topic><topic>Reference Standards</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Thresholds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leong, David L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rainford, Louise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haygood, Tamara Miner</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitman, Gary J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tchou, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geiser, William R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carkaci, Selin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brennan, Patrick C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of digital imaging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leong, David L.</au><au>Rainford, Louise</au><au>Haygood, Tamara Miner</au><au>Whitman, Gary J.</au><au>Tchou, Philip M.</au><au>Geiser, William R.</au><au>Carkaci, Selin</au><au>Brennan, Patrick C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds</atitle><jtitle>Journal of digital imaging</jtitle><stitle>J Digit Imaging</stitle><addtitle>J Digit Imaging</addtitle><date>2012-10-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>662</spage><epage>669</epage><pages>662-669</pages><issn>0897-1889</issn><eissn>1618-727X</eissn><abstract>While previous research has determined the contrast detection threshold in medical images, it has focused on uniform backgrounds, has not used calibrated monitors, or has involved a low number of readers. With complex clinical images, how the Grayscale Standard Display Function (GSDF) affects the detection threshold and whether the median background intensity shift has been minimized by GSDF remains unknown. We set out to determine if the median background affected the detection of a low-contrast object in a clustered lumpy background, which simulated a mammography image, and to define the contrast detection threshold for these complex images. Clustered lumpy background images were created of different median intensities and disks of varying contrasts were inserted. A reader study was performed with 17 readers of varying skill level who scored with a five-point confidence scale whether a disk was present. The results were analyzed using reader operating characteristic (ROC) methodology. Contingency tables were used to determine the contrast detection threshold. No statistically significant difference was seen in the area under the ROC curve across all of the backgrounds. Contrast detection fell below 50 % between +3 and +2 gray levels. Our work supports the conclusion that Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine GSDF calibrated monitors do perceptually linearize detection performance across shifts in median background intensity. The contrast detection threshold was determined to be +3 gray levels above the background for an object of 1° visual angle.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>22535193</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10278-012-9478-2</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0897-1889
ispartof Journal of digital imaging, 2012-10, Vol.25 (5), p.662-669
issn 0897-1889
1618-727X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3447097
source MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Area Under Curve
Calibration
Cohort Studies
Confidence Intervals
Contrast Sensitivity
Data Display
Digital imaging
Disks
False Positive Reactions
Female
Humans
Image contrast
Imaging
Liquid Crystals
Mammography - methods
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Monitors
Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation
Radiology
Radiology Information Systems - standards
Readers
Reference Standards
ROC Curve
Thresholds
title Verification of DICOM GSDF in Complex Backgrounds
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T06%3A14%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Verification%20of%20DICOM%20GSDF%20in%20Complex%20Backgrounds&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20digital%20imaging&rft.au=Leong,%20David%20L.&rft.date=2012-10-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=662&rft.epage=669&rft.pages=662-669&rft.issn=0897-1889&rft.eissn=1618-727X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10278-012-9478-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1671351282%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1041130342&rft_id=info:pmid/22535193&rfr_iscdi=true