References

Eye-Position Recording
Visual Search Models & Theory
Chest Imaging & Pulmonary Nodule Detection
Skeletal Imaging
Mammography
Role of Experience
Satisfaction of Search
Perception & CAD
ROC & Other Statistical Methods to Measure Observer Performance
Error & Variability in Radiographic Interpretations
General Search & Perception Issues
Dental Imaging
Perceptual Feedback
Viewing Time
Dual Reading
Teaching & Training Issues
Perception & Psychophysics
General Perception Topics
Ergonomics & Computer Applications
Clinical History & Prompting Effects
T-scope Studies
Teleradiology, PACS & Telemedicine
Signal Detection & Noise
Detection in Degraded & Compressed Images
Motion in Radiographic Images
MRI Imaging
CT Imaging
CR & Other Digital Images
Image Quality & Ideal Observer Models
Perceptual Linearization

Semiotics in Radiologic Interpretation

 

EYE-POSITION RECORDING

Carmody DP et al.  Performance of a computer system for recording eye fixations using limbus reflection Behav Res Meth, Instr & Comp 1980;12:63-66. 

Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Toto LC, Krupinski EA. Recording and analyzing eye-position data using a microcomputer workstation. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers 1992;24:475-485.

Papin JP et al. Use of NAC Eye Mark by radiologists. In AG Gale & F Johnson (eds). Theoretical & Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands, Elsevier Science, 323-330,1984.

VISUAL SEARCH MODELS & THEORY

Barrett JR & Dwyer SJ.  Modeling the visual search patterns of mammographers as a Markov process.  SPIE Med Imaging 1995;2436:116-123. 

Blesser B & Ozonoff D.  A model for the radiologic process.  Radiology 1972;103:515-521. 

Kundel HL, Nodine CF. A visual concept shapes image perception. Radiology 1983;146:363-368.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Thickman D, Toto L. Searching for lung nodules : a comparison of human performance with random and systematic scanning models. I nvest Radiol 1987;22:417-422.

Nodine CF, Kundel HL. The cognitive side of visual search in radiology. In : JK O'Regan, A. Levy-Schoen eds. Eye Movements: From Physiology to Cognition, New York : Elsevier Science; 1987: 573-582.

Pauli R & Hammond SM.  Modeling two levels of radiological skill: an example from breast cancer screening.  SPIE Med Imaging 1994;2166:76-85. 

Swensson RG. A two-stage detection model applied to skilled visual search by radiologists. P&P 1980;27:11-16.

Toto L, et al. A radiologist takes a random walk. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

CHEST IMAGING & PULMONARY NODULE DETECTION

Carmody DP et al.  Finding lung nodules with & without comparative scanning.  P&P 1981;29:594-598. 

Carmody DP, Kundel HL, Nodine CF. Comparison scans while reading chest images : taught but not practiced. Invest Radiol 1984;19:462-466.

Carmody DP, Nodine CF, Kundel HL. Global and segmented search for lung tumors of different edge gradients. Invest Radiol 1980;15:224-233.

DeValk JPJ & Eijkman EGJ.  Analysis of eye fixations during the diagnostic interpretation of chest radiographs.  Med & Biol Eng & Computing 1984;July:353-360. 

Gale AG & Worthington BS.  The utility of scanning strategies in radiology.  In R Groner et al. (Eds).  Eye Movements & Psychological Functions: International Views.  Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 169-191,1983. 

Gale AG et al. Circadian variation in radiology.  In AG Gale & F Johnson (eds).  Theoretical & Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research.  Amsterdam, Netherlands, Elsevier Science, 305-312,1984. 

Krupinski EA, Nodine CF, Kundel HL. Perceptual enhancement of tumor targets in chest x-ray images. Perception & Psychophysics 1993;53:519-526.

Krupinski EA, Nodine CF, Kundel HL. A perceptually based method for enhancing pulmonary nodule recognition. Invest Radiol 1993;28:289-294.

Kundel Hl.  Visual sampling & estimates of the location of information on chest films.  Invest Rad 1974; 9:87-93. 

Kundel HL & Nodine CF.  Studies of eye movements & visual search in radiology.  In JW Senders et al. (eds). Eye Movements & the Higher Psychological Functions.  Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, 317-328,1978. 

Kundel HL, Nodine CF. Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search. Radiology 1975;116:527-532.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Carmody D. Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. Invest Radiol 1978;13:175-181.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Krupinski EA. Searching for lung nodules : visual dwell indicates locations of false-positive and false-negative decisions. Invest Radiol 1989;24:472-478.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Krupinski EA. Computer-displayed eye position as a visual aid to pulmonary tumor interpretation. Invest Radiol 1990;25:890-896.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto L. Eye movements and the detection of lung tumors in chest images. In : AG Gale, F Johnson eds. Theoretical and Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research, New York : Elsevier Science; 1984: 297-304.

Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto LC. Searching for lung nodules : the guidance of visual search. Invest Radiol 1991; 26:777-781.

Kundel HL, Wright DJ. The influence of prior knowledge on visual search strategies during the viewing of chest radiographs. Radiology 1969;93:315-320.

Kundel HL, et al.  An eye-movement study of the effects of task specification and visual distractors on the search for lung nodules.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Li X, Samei E, Delong DM, Jones RP, Gaca AM, Hollingsworth CL, Maxfield CM, Carrico CW,Frush DP, "Three-dimensional simulation of lung nodules for paediatric multidetector array CT," Br J Radiol 82, 401-411 (2009).

Li X, Samei E, DeLong DM, Jones RP, Gaca AM, Hollingsworth CL, Maxfield CM, Colsher JG,Frush DP, "Pediatric MDCT: towards assessing the diagnostic influence of dose reduction on the detection of small lung nodules," Acad Radiol 16, 872-880 (2009).

Manning DJ, Ethell S, Donovan T, Crawford TJ . How do radiologists do it? The influence of experience and training on searching for chest nodules. Radiography, 2006 12(2) 134-142.

Manning D, SC Barker-Mill, T Donovan, T Crawford. Time dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule detection.  British Journal of Radiology 2006;79: 342-346

Manning D, S Ethell, T. Donovan. Detection or decision errors? Missed lung cancers from the PA chest radiograph. British Journal of Radiology 2004;77: 231-236 

Manning DJ,  S Bunting,  J Leach. An ROC Evaluation of  Systems for Chest Radiography.Radiography 1999:5(4):201-209.

Manning DJ,  S Bunting,  J Leach. A comparison of expert and non-expert performance in the detection of simulated pulmonary nodules.Radiography 2000;6:111-11


Nodine CF, Krupinski EA, Kundel HL. A perceptually-based algorithm provides effective visual feedback to radiologists searching for lung nodules. Proceedings of the First Conference on Visualization in Biomedical Computing 1990:202-207.

Nodine CF, Kundel HL. Using eye movements to study visual search and to improve tumor detection. RadioGraphics 1987;7:1241-1250.

Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Polikoff JB, Toto LC. Using eye movements to study decision making of radiologists. In : G Luer, U Lass, J Shallo-Hoffman eds. Eye Movement research : Physiological and Psychological Aspects, Gottigen : CJ Hogrefe Publ.; 1988: 349-363.

Potsaid MS.  Cine & TV methods of analyzing search in roentgen diagnosis.  J of the SMPTE 1965;74:731-736. 

Samei E, et al.  The influence of anatomical noise in the detection of lung nodules in chest radiography.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Sherrier RH, Chiles C, Wilkinson WE, Johnson GA, Ravin CE.  Effects of image processing on nodule detection rates in digitized chest radiographs: ROC study of observer performance.  Radiol 1988;166:447-450. 

Thomas EL & Lansdown EL. Visual search patterns of radiologists in training. Radiology 1963;81:288-291.

Thomas EL. Movements of the eye. Sci Amer 1968;219:88-95.

Thomas EL. Search behavior. Rad Cl of North Am 1969;7:403-417.

Wooding D, et al. Similarities in the eye movements of radiologists. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

 

SKELETAL IMAGING

Hu CH, Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Krupinski EA, Toto LC. Searching for bone fractures : a comparison with pulmonary nodule search. Acad Radiol 1994;1:25-32.

Krupinski EA, Lund PJ. Why does it take longer to diagnose x-ray images from monitors than film? Acad Radiol 1996, Submitted.

Krupinski EA, Lund PJ. Differences in time to interpretation for evaluation of bone radiographs with monitor versus film viewing. Acad Radiol 1997;4:177-182.

Lund PJ, Krupinski EA, Pereles S, Mackbee B. Comparison of conventional and computed radiography: assessment of image quality and reader performance in skeletal extremity trauma. Acad Radiol 1997;4:570-576.

Piraino DW, Davros WJU, et al. Direct digital versus conventional film screen radiography of the musculoskeletal system. J Dig Imaging 1998;11:172-173.

MAMMOGRAPHY

Barrett JR et al.  Unobtrusively tracking eye gaze direction & pupil diameter of mammographers.  Acad Rad 1994;1:40-45. 


Cowley H, et al. Performance of non-radiologists in mammographic diagnosis.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Gale AG et al.  Breast screening: visual search & observer performance.  SPIE Med Imaging 1994;2166:66-75. 

Krupinski EA. Visual scanning patterns of radiologists searching mammograms. Acad Radiol 1996;3:137-144.

Krupinski EA, Nishikawa RM. Comparison of eye-position vs computer identified microcalcification clusters on mammograms. Med Physics 1996; In Press.

Krupinski EA, Nodine CF. Gaze duration predicts the locations of missed lesions in mammography. In : AG Gale et al. eds. Digital Mammography, New York : Elsevier Science;1994:399-403.

Krupinski EA. Searching mammograms - what recording eye position reveals. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

Krupinski EA, Roehrig H, Yu T.  Observer performance comparison of digital radiograph systems for stereotactic breast needle biopsy.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:116-122. 

Mugglestone MC. Breast cancers missed at screening: an eye movement perspective. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

Mugglestone MD et al. Defining the perceptual processes involved with mammographic diagnostic errors. SPIE Med Imaging 1996;2712:71-77.

Mugglestone M, et al.  Visual search behavior of radiologists interpreting mammographic images in a realistic breast cancer screening environment.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Pisano ED, Chandramouli J et al. Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms? J Dig Imaging 1997;10:79-84.

Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al. The effect of intensity windowing on the detection of simulated masses embedded in dense portions of digitized mammograms in a laboratory setting. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:174-182.

Roehrig H, Krupinski E.  Image quality of CRT displays and the effect of brightness on diagnosis of mammograms.  J Dig Imaging 1998;11:187-188.

Schmidt RA, Newstead GM, et al.  Mammographic screening sensitivity of general radiologists.  4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands.

Shaw CC, Wang TP, King JL, et al.  Computer radiography versus screen-film mammography in detection of simulated microcalcifications: a receiver operating characteristic study based on phantom images.  Acad Radiol 1998;5:173-180. 

Swarnaklar V, Jeong M, Smith S, Kim H, Wobschall DC.  Effect of the reconstruction technique on the quality of digital mosaic mammograms.  SPIE 1998;3340:117-127. 

Wang J, Gray JE. Detection of small low-contrast objects in mammography: effect of viewbox masking and luminance. AJR 1997;170:105-108.

Waynant RW, chakrabarti K, et al. Improved sensitivity and specificity of mammograms by producing uniform luminance from viewboxes. J Dig Imaging 1998;11:189-191.


ROLE OF EXPERIENCE


Davies IR et al.  Expertise in categorizing mammograms: a perceptual or conceptual skill?  SPIE Med Imaging 1994;2166:86-104. 

Harrison CP.  The radiograph as a phenomenon.  Canad Med Assoc J 1965;93:110-112. 

Herman PG, Hessel SJ.  Accuracy and its relationship to experience in the interpretation of chest radiographs.  Invest Radiol 1975;10:62-67. 

Herman PG & Hessel SJ.  Accuracy & its relationship to experience in the interpretation of chest radiographs.  Invest Rad 1975;10:62-67. 

Krupinski EA. Influence of experience on scanning strategies in mammography. SPIE Medical Imaging Proceedings 1996;2712:95-101.

Krupinski EA, Weinstein RS, Rozek LS.  Experience-related differences in diagnosis from medical images displayed on monitors.  Telemedicine Journal 1996;2:101-108. 

Kundel HL, LaFollette PS. Visual search patterns and experience with radiological images. Radiology 1981;81:288-292.

Maloney K, et al.  Fuzzy trace theory: the development of expertise in radiology.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.


Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Lauver SC, Toto LC. The nature of expertise in searching mammograms for breast lesions. SPIE Medical Imaging Proceedings 1996;2712:89-94.

Nodine CF. Naive & experienced viewers: searching mammograms. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

Nodine CF, Liu H, Miller WT, Kundel HL. Observer performance in the localization of tubes and catheters on digital chest images: the role of expertise and image enhancement. Acad Radiol 1996;3:834-841.

Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Lauver SC, Toto LC. Nature of expertise in searching mammograms for breast masses. Acad Radiol 1996;3:1000-1006.

Nodine C, et al.  Perceptual skill, radiology expertise and visual test performance with NINA and WALDO.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Nodine CF, Krupinski EA.  Perceptual skill, radiology expertise, and visual test performance with NINA and WALDO.  Acad Radiol 1998;5:603-612.

Qu G, Huda W, Belden CJ. Comparison of trained and untrained observers using subjective and objective measures of imaging performance. Acad Radiol 1996;3:31-35.


SATISFACTION OF SEARCH

Berbaum KS, Franken EA, Dorfman DD, Miller EM, Krupinski EA, Kreinbring K, Caldwell RT, Lu CH. The cause of satisfaction of search effects in contrast studies of the abdomen. Invest Radiol 1996; 3:815-826..

Berbaum KS et al. Causes of SOS effects in abdominal contrast studies. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

Berbaum KS et al. Time course of SOS. Invest Rad 1991;7:640-648.

Berbaum et al. SOS in diagnostic radiology. Invest Rad 1990;25:133-140.

Berbaum KS, Franken EA, Dorfman DD, Miller EM, Caldwell RT, Kuehn DM, Berbaum ML. Role of faulty search in the satisfaction of search effect in chest radiography. Acad Radiol 1998;5:9-19.

Berbaum K, et al. The role of faulty search in SOS effects in chest radiography. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Samuels S, Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto LC.  Mechanism of satisfaction of search : eye position recordings in the reading of chest radiographs.  Radiology 1995;94:895-902

PERCEPTION & CAD

Kallergi M, Clarke LP, Qian W, Gavrielides M, Venugopal P, Berman CG, Holman-Ferris SD, Miller MS, Clark RA.  Interpretation of calcifications in screen/film, digitized, and wavelet-enhanced monitor-displayed mammograms: a receiver operating characteristic study.  Acad Radiol 1996;3:285-293. 

Krupinski EA, Nishikawa RM. Comparison of eye position versus computer identified microcalcification clusters on mammograms. Med Phys 1997;24:17-23.

Krupinski EA. An eye-movement study on the use of CAD information during mammographic search. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

ROC & OTHER STATISTICAL METHODS TO MEASURE OBSERVER PERFORMANCE


Arkin CF, Wachtel MS.  How many patients are necessary to assess test performance?  JAMA 1990;263:275-278. 

Beam CA.  Strategies for improving power in diagnostic radiology research.  AJR 1992;159:631-637. 

Beam CA.  Random-effects models in the receiver operating characteristic curve-based assessment of the effectiveness of diagnostic imaging technology: concepts, approaches, and issues.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:S4-S13. 

Beck JR, Shultz EK.  The use of relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves in test performance evaluation.  Arch Pathol Lab Med 1986;110:13-20. 

Berbaum KS, Dorfman DD, Franken EA.  Measuring observer performance by ROC analysis: indictions and complications.  Invest Radiol 1989;24:228-233.

Beytas EM, Debatin JF, Blinder RA.  Accuract and predictive value as measures of imaging test performance.  Invest Radiol 1992;27:374-378. 

Black WC, Dwyer AJ.  Local versus global measures of accuracy: an important distinction for diagnostic imaging.  Med decis Making 1990; 10:266-273. 

Burgess AE.  Comparison of receiver operating characteristic and forced choice observer performance measurement methods.  Med Phys 1995;22:643-655. 

Chakraborty DP, Winter LHL.  Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment.  Radiol 1990;174:873-881. 

Chakraborty DP.  Maximum likelihood analysis of free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) data.  Med Phys 1989;16:561-568. 

Chakraborty D.  On measuring differences in diagnostic task performance.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18-1997.


de Vries SO, Hunink MG, Polak JF.  Summary receiver operating characteristic curves as a technique for meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of duplex ultrasonography in peripheral arterial disease.  Acad Radiol 1996;3:361-369. 

Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, et al.  Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for ROC discrete rating data: factorial experimental design.  Acad Radiol 1998;5:591-602.

Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE, Lenth RV, Hanley JA, Dagga HA.  Proper receiver operasting characteristic analysis: the bigamma model.  Acad Radiol 1997;4:138-149. 


Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS.  Degeneracy and discrete receiver operating characteristic rating data.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:907-915. 

Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV.  Multireader, multicase receiver operating characteristic methodology: a bootstrap analysis.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:626-633. 

Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE.  Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis : generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method.  Invest Radiol 1992;27:723-731. 

Dorfman et al.  Statistical analysis of multireader receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: validation by computer simulation.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Gallas BD; Bandos A; Samuelson F, Wagner RF. (2009), 'A Framework for Random-Effects ROC Analsysis: Biases with theBootstrap and Other Variance Estimators', Commun Stat A-Theory 38 (15), 2586-2603.

Gallas BD, Brown DG. (2008), 'Reader Studies for Validation of CAD Systems', Neural Networks 21 (2-3), 387-397.

Gallas BD; Pennello GA, Myers K J. (2007), 'Multi-Reader Multi-Case Variance Analysis for Binary Data', J Opt Soc Am A 24 (12), B70-B80.

Gatsonis CA.  Random-effects models for diagnostic accuracy data.  Acad radiol 1995;2:S14-S21. 

Hajian-Tilaki KO, Hanley JA, Joseph L, Collet JP.  Extension of receiver operating characteristic analysis to data concerning multiple signal detection tasks.  Acad Radiol 1997;2:222-229. 

Halpern EJ, Albert M, Krieger AM, Metz CE, Maidment AD.  Comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves on the basis of optimal operating points.  Acad Radiol 1996;3:245-253. 

Hanley JA, McNeil BJ.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.  Radiol 1982;143:29-36. 


Hanley JA, Hajian-Tilaki KO.  Sampling variability of nanparametric estimates of the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves: an update.  Acad Radiol 1997;4:49-58. 

Henkelman RM, Kay I, Bronskill MJ.  Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis without truth.  Med Decis Making 1990;10:24-30. 

Hillis SL. Simulation of Unequal-Variance Binormal Multireader ROC Decision Data: An Extension of the Roe and Metz Simulation Model (2012). Academic Radiology, 19, 1518-1528.

Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Berbaum KS (2011) Power estimation for multireader ROC methods: an updated and unified approach, Academic Radiology, 18, 129-142.

Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE (2008) Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis, Academic Radiology, 15:647-661.

Hillis SL (2007) A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods for multiple observer ROC analysis, Statistics in Medicine, 26:596-619.

Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS (2005) A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette Methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data, Statistics in Medicine, 24:1579-1607


Judy P et al.  ROC curves using only target images.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Judy et al.  A comparison of forced choice and ROC methods for measuring observer performance.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

King JL, Britton CA, Gur D, Rockette HE, Davis PL.  On the validity of the continuous and discrete confidence rating scales in receiver operating characteristic studies.  Invest Radiol 1993;28:962-963. 


Kroon HM, Steyerberg EW, Kool LJS, Hilkens CMU, Seeley GW.  Considerations in compiling a database of clinical test images.  Invest Radiol 1992;27:255-263. 


Kundel HL, Polamsky M.  Comparing observer performance with mixture distribution analysis when there is no external gold standard.  SPIE 1998;3340:78-84. 

Massof RW, Emmel TC.  Criterion-free parameter-free distribution-independent index of diagnostic test performance. Applied optics 1987;26:1395-1408. 

McNeil BJ, Hanley JA.  Statistical approaches to the analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.  Med Decis Making 1984;4:137-150. 

Merrmann C, Buhr E, Hoeschen D, Fan SY.  Comparison of ROC and AFC methods in a visual detection task.  Med Phys 1993;20:805-811. 

Metz CE.  Basic principles of ROC analysis.  Seminars in Nuc Med 1978;8:283-298. 

Metz CE.  Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies.  Invest Radiol 1989;24:234-245. 


Metz CE.  Quantification of failure to demonstrate statistical significance: the usefulness of confidence intervals.  Invest Radiol 1993;28:59-63. 

Metz CE, Shen JH, Herman BA.  New methods for estimating a bi-normal ROC curve from continuously-distributed test results.  Paper presented at the 1990 Annual Meeting of the American Statistical Association, Anaheim, CA, August 7, 1990. 


Obuchowski NA, Lieber ML.  Confidence intervals for the receiver operating characteristic area in studies with small samples.  Acad Radiol 1998;5:561-571.


Obuchowski NA, Zepp RC.  Simple steps for improving multiple-reader studies in radiology.  AJR 1996;166:517-521. 


Obuchowski NA.  Computing sample size for receiver operating characteristic studies.  Invest Radiol 1994;29:238-243. 

Obuchowski NA.  Multireader receiver operating characteristic studies: a comparison of study designs.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:709-716. 

Obuchowski NA.  Multireader, multimodality receiver operating characteristic curve studies: hypothesis testing and sample size estimation using an analysis of variance approach with dependent observations.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:S22-S29. 

Pan X, Metz CE.  The "proper" bi-normal model: parametric receiver operating characteristic curve estimation with degenerate data.  Acad Radiol 1997;4:380-389. 

Patton DD.  Introduction to clinical decision making.  Seminars in Nuc Med 1978;8:273-282. 

Quinn MF.  Relation of observer agreement to accuracy according to a two-receiver signal detection model of diagnosis.  Med Decis Making 1989;9:196-206. 

Revesz G, Kundel HL, Bopnitatibus M.  The effect of verification on the assessment of imaging techniques.  Invest Radiol 1983;18:194-198. 


Rockette HE, King JL, Medina JL, Eisen HB, Brown ML, Gur D.  Imaging systems evaluation: effect of subtle cases on the design and analysis of receiver operating characteristic studies.  AJR 1995;165:679-683. 

Rockette HE, Gur D, Metz CE.  The use of continuous and discrete confidence judgments in receiver operating characteristic studies of diagnostic imaging techniques.  Invest Radiol 1992;27:169-172. 

Rockette HE, Gur D, Kurs-Lashy M, King JL.  On the generalization of the receiver operating characteristic analysis to the population of readers and cases with the jackknife method: an assessment.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:66-69. 

Rockette HE, King JL, Thaete FL, Fuhrman CR, Slifko RM, Gur D.  Selection of subtle cases for observer-performance studies: the importance of knowing the true diagnosis.  Acad Rad 1998;5:86-92. 

Roe CA, Metz CE.  Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method for statistical analysis of multireader, multimodality receiver operating characteristic data : validation with computer simulation.  Acad Radiol 1997;4:298-303. 

Roe CA, Metz CE.  Variance-component modeling in the analysis of receiver operating characteristic index estimates.  Acad Radiol 1997;4:587-600. 

Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA.  Regression methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test data.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:S48-S56. 

Shapiro DE.  Issues combining independent estimates of the sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic test.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:S37-S47. 

Swensson RG. Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. Med Phys 1996;23:1709-1725.

Swensson RG, Judy PF. Measuring performance efficiency and consistency in visual discimminations with noisy images. J of Exptl Psych: HP&P 1996;22:1393-1415.

Swensson RG.  Measuring detection and localization performance.  In Barrett HH & Gmitro AF (Eds) Information processing in medical imaging (pp 525-541), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993. 

Swensson R, et al.  Observer detection efficiency for targets in unknown locations.  Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Swets JA. ROC analysis applied to the evaluation of medical imaging techniques. Invest Radiol 1979;14:109-121.

Swets JA, Pickett RM. Evaluation of diagnostic systems: methods from signal detection theory. Academic Press, New York, 1982.

Toledano A, Gatsonis CA.  Regression analysis of correlated receiver operating characteristic data.  Acad Radiol 1995;2:S30-S36. 

Uebersax JS. Modeling approaches for the analysis of observer agreement. Invest Radiol 1992;9:738-743.

Zou KH, Tempany CM, et al. Original smooth receiver operating characteristic curve estimation from continuous data: statistical methods for analyzing the predictive value of spiral CT of ureteral stones. Acad rad 1998;5:680-687.

ERROR & VARIABILITY IN RADIOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATIONS

Berlin L, Hendrix RW.  Perceptual errors and negligence.  AJR 1998;170:863-867. 

Birkelo CC et al.  Tuberculosis case finding: a comparison of roentgenographic and photofluorographic methods.  JAMA 1947;133:359-366. 

Coblentz CL, Babcook CJ, Alton D, et al.  Observer variation in detecting the radiologic features associated with bronchiolitis.  Invest Radiol 1991;26:115-118. 

Cochrane AL & Garland LH.  Observer error in interpretation of chest films: international investigation.  Lancet 1952;2:505-509. 

Garland LH.  On reliability of roentgen survey procedures.  AJR 1950;64:32-41.  

Garland LH.  The scientific evaluation of diagnostic procedures.  Radiology 1949; 52:309-327. 

Garland LH.  Studies on the accuracy of diagnostic procedures.  AJR 1959;82:25-38. 


Groth-Petersen E et al.  On reliability of reading of photofluorograms and value of dual reading.  Acta Tuberc Scandanavia 1952;26:13-37.

Herman PG et al.  Disagreements in chest roentgen interpretation.  Chest 1975;68:278-282. 

Johnson ML.  Observer error: its bearing on teaching.  Lancet 1955;2:422-424. 

Kundel HL.  Perception errors in chest radiography.  Seminars in Resp Med 1989; 10:203-210. 

Newell et al. Descriptive classification of pulmonary shadows.  Revelation of unreliability in roentgenographic diagnosis of TB.  Am Rev Tuberc 1954;69:566-584. 

Robinson PJA. Radiology's achilles heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Rontgen image. British J of Radiol 1997; 70:1085-1098.

Siegle RL, Baram EM, Reuter SR, et al.  Rates of disagreement in imaging interpretation in a group of community hospitals.  Acad Radiol 1998;5:148-154. 

Yerushalmy J. Reliability of chest radiography in diagnosis of pulmonary lesions. Am J Surgery 1955;89:231-240.

Zwerling et al. Clinical importance of lesions undetected in mass radiographic survey of chest. Am rev Tuberc 1951;64:249-255.


GENERAL SEARCH & PERCEPTION ISSUES


Brandt HF. The psychology of seeing. NY: Philosophical Library, Inc. 1945.

Buswell G. How people look at pictures. Chicago, IL, Chicago University Press. 1935.

Carmody DP et al.  An analysis of perceptual & cognitive factors in radiographic interpretation.  Perception 1980;9:339-344. 

Goin JE, Hermann GA.  The clinical efficacy of diagnostic imaging evaluation studies: problems, paradigms and prescriptions.  Invest radiol 1991;26:507-511. 

Manning D, J Leach. Perceptual and signal detection factors in radiography. Ergonomics  2002;45(15):1103-1116

Manning DJ. Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance in Radiography. Radiography 1998;4(1): 49-60

Riebel FA.  Use of the eyes in x-ray diagnosis.  Radiology 1958;70:252-258. 

Tuddenham WJ & Calvert WP. Visual search patterns in roentgen diagnosis. Radiology 1961;76:255-256.

Tuddenham WJ. Visual search, image organization, & reader error in roentgen diagnosis. Radiology 1962;78:694-704.

Tuddenham WJ. Visual problems of roentgen interpretation. NY State J of Med, 1960; April:1234-1238.


DENTAL IMAGING

Van der Stelt-Schouten et al. Eye movements on dental images. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

PERCEPTUAL FEEDBACK

Krupinski EA.  Perceptual enhancement of pulmonary nodule recognition in chest radiographs.  SPIE Med Imaging 1994;2166:59-65. 

Kundel HL et al.  Computer-displayed eye position as a visual aid to pulmonary nodule interpretation.  Invest Rad 1990;8:890-896. 

Krupinski EA et al.  A perceptually based method for enhancing pulmonary nodule recognition.  Invest Rad 1993;28:289-294. 

Krupinski EA et al.  Perceptual enhancement of tumor targets in chest x-ray images.  P&P 1993;53:519-526. 

Kundel HL et al.  Further observations on the k effect.  6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995. 

Nodine CF & Kundel HL. A visual dwell algorithm can aid search & recognition of missed lung nodules in chest radiographs. In D Brogdan (ed). First International Conference on Visual Search. London, England, Taylor & Francis, 399-406,1990.

Nodine CF et al. A perceptually-based algorithm provides effective visual feedback to radiologists searching for lung nodules. Proc of the First Conf on Visualization in Biomedical Computing. Los Alamitos, CA, IEEE Computer Society, 1990;202-207.

Nodine CF & Kundel HL. Computer-assisted perception aids pulmonary nodule detection. SPIE Med Imaging 1994;2166:55-58.

VIEWING TIME EYE-POSITION RECORDING


Carmody DP et al.  Performance of a computer system for recording eye fixations using limbus reflection Behav Res Meth, Instr & Comp 1980;12:63-66. 

Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Toto LC, Krupinski EA. Recording and analyzing eye- position data using a microcomputer workstation. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers 1992;24:475-485.

Papin JP et al. Use of NAC Eye Mark by radiologists. In AG Gale & F Johnson (eds). Theoretical & Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands, Elsevier Science, 323-330,1984.

DUAL READING

Beam CA et al. Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography. Acad Rad 1996;3:891-897.

Yerushalmy J et al. Role of dual reading in mass radiography. Am Rev Tuberc 1950;61:443-464.


TEACHING & TRAINING ISSUES


Sowden P & Davies I. The nature of perceptual skills in screening mammography: implications for training. SPIE Med Imaging 1995;2436:143-155. 

Squire LF. Perception related to learning radiology in medical school. Rad Cl of North Am 1969;7:485-497. 

Thompson BH, Berbaum KS, George MJ, Ely JW. Identifying left lower lobe pneumonia at chest radiography: performance of family practice residents before and after a didactic session. Acad Radiol 1998;5:324-328.

Tuddenham WJ. The use of logical flow charts as an aid in teaching roentgen diagnosis. Radiology 1968;102:797-803.

Tuddenham WJ et al. Preliminary evaluation of effectiveness of logical flow charts in teaching roentgen diagnosis. Radiology 1969;93:17-24.

Wackenheim A. La polarite de l'image radiologique. J de Radiologie 1984;65:781-783.

Wackenheim A. La segregation d'units figurales par la proximite et la resemblance de leurs composants. J de Radiologie 1984;65:437-441.

Wackenheim A. La lecture structuraliste de l'image radiologique. J de Radiologie 1984;65:61-69.

Wackenheim A & Zollner G. Symetrie, asymetrie et dissymetrie. Annales de Radiologie 1987;30:60-64.

Wackenheim A. L'heuristique des systemes experts en radiodiagnostique. J de Radiologie 1986;67:853-861.

Wackenheim A. La pensee laterale, pilote de le pensee verticale. J de Radiolgie 1986;67:55-58.

PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS

Alter AJ et al. The influence of ambient & viewbox light upon visual detection of low-contrast targets in a radiograph. Invest Rad 1982;17:402-406. 

Hebb DO & Favreau O. The mechanism of perception. Rad Cl of North Am 1969;7:393-401.

Huda W et al. How does radiation dose and contrast enhancement affect visibility of contrast detail phantom images. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Kundel HL. Peripheral vision, structural noise and film reader error. Radiology 1975;114:269-273.

Kundel HL & Revesz G. The influence of film density on the radiologic detection of lung lesions. Invest Rad 1977;12:199-200.

Kundel HL & Revesz G. Lesion conspicuity, structural noise, & film reader error. AJR 1976;126:1233-1238. 

Kundel HL et al. Contrast gradient & the detection of lung nodules. Invest Rad 1979;14:18-22. 

Revesz G et al. The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. Invest Rad 1974;9:479-486.

Revesz G & Kundel HL. Psychophysical studies & detection errors in chest radiology. Radiology 1077;123:559-562.

Kundel HL. Predictive value & threshold detectability of lung tumors. Radiology 1981;139:25-29.

Kundel HL et al. Nodule detection with & without a chest image. Invest Rad 1985;20:94-99.

Liu H, Fajardo LL, Barrett JR, Baxter RA. Contrast-detail detectability analysis: comparison of a digital spot mammography system and an analog screen-film mammography system. Acad Radiol 1997;4:197-203.

Peters KR. Perception of coherent 2-D signal and symbol arrays through contrast patterns. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

GENERAL PERCEPTION TOPICS

Brogdon BG et al. Factors affecting perception of pulmonary nodules. Rad Cl of North Am 1983;21:633-654. 

Gale AG et al. Circadian variation in radiology. In AG Gale & F Johnson (eds). Theoretical & Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands, Elsevier Science, 313-321,1984. 

Gale AG et al. Vigilance decrement & radiological reporting. In Megaw (ed). Contemporary Ergonomics. London, England, Taylor & Francis, 461-467,1989. 


Krupinski EA. Clinical assessment of dry-laser-processed film versus traditional wet-processed film with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound. Acad Radiol 1996;3:855-858. 

Kundel HL. Radiological image perception. Applied Radiology 1975;Mar/Apr:27-96. 

Kundel HL. Disease prevalence & radiological decision making. Invest Rad 1982;17:107-109. 

Kundel HL. Medical image perception. Acad Radiol 1995;2:S108-S110.

Tuddenham WJ. Roentgen image perception - a personal survey of the problem. Rad Cl of North Am 1969;7:499-501.


ERGONOMICS & COMPUTER APPLICATIONS

Beard DV et al. A radiology workstation for mammography: preliminary observations, eyetracker studies, & design. SPIE Medical Imaging 1991;1446:289-296.

Beard DV et al. A pilot study of eye movement during mammography interpretation: eyetracker results & workstation design implications. J Dig Imaging, 1997;10:14-20.

Dunn SM et al. Expert eye movements as a sample space for image processing. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995. 

Erickson BJ, Manducs A, Palisson P, et al. Wavelet compression of medical images. Radiology 1998;206:599-608. 

Krupinski EA & Lund PJ. Comparison of film vs monitor viewing of CR films using eye-position recording. In RF Kilcoyne et al. (eds). SCAR '96, Carlsbad, CA, Symposia Foundation, 269-274,1996.

Krupinski EA & Nishikawa RM. Comparison of eye-position vs computer identified microcalcifications on mammograms. Med Phys 1997; 24:17-23.

Krupinski EA & Lund PJ. Differences in time to interpretation for evaluation of bone radiographs on monitor & film. Acad Rad 1997;4:177-182.

Krupinski EA, Evanoff M, Ovitt T, Standen JR, Chu TX, Johnson J. Influence of image processing on chest radiograph interpretation and decision changes. Acad Rad 1998;5:79-85. 

Krupinski EA, Evanoff M. Effect of image processing on diagnostic decisions in chest radiography. SPIE 1998;3340:92-98. 

Krupinski EA, Roehrig H, Furukawa T, Tang C. Influence of monitor luminance and tone scale on observer detection performance. SPIE 1998;3340:99-104. 

Krupinski EA. the radiologist and automated image analysis. Paper presented at the Research Workshop on Automated Medical Image Analysis. Ballarat, Australia; July 31 - Aug 1,1998.

Krupinski EA, Roehrig H. Observer performance with mammographic images as a function of display (monitor) luminance. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

McGrath SP et al. Image processing with gaze selected sample space. 6th Far West Image Perception Conference, 13-15 Oct, Philadelphia, PA,1995.

Niimi R, Shimamoto K et al. Eye-tracking device comparisons of three methods of magnetic resonance image series display. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:147-151.

Savcenko V, Erickson BJ, Palisson PM, et al. Detection of subtle abnormalities on chest radiographs after irreversible compression. Radiology 1998;206:609-616.

CLINICAL HISTORY & PROMPTING EFFECTS

Aideyan VO et al. Influence of prior radiologic information on the interpretation of radiographic examinations. Acad Rad 1995;2:205-208. 


Astley SM et al. Prompting in mammography: how good must prompt generators be? 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands.

Berbaum KS et al. Influence of clinical history on visual search with single & multiple abnormalities. Invest Rad 1993;28:191-201.

Berbaum KS et al. Tentative diagnoses facilitate the detection of diverse lesions in chest radiographs. Invest Rad 1986;7:532-539.

Berbaum et al. Clinical history affects perception. 5th Far West Image Perception Conference, 7-10 Oct, Newport, RI,1993. 

Berbaum KS et al. Influence of clinical history upon detection of nodules & other lesions. Invest Rad 1988;23:48-55. 

Berbaum KS et al. Impact of clinical history on fracture detection with radiography. Radiology 1988;168:507-511. 

Berbaum KS et al. Impact of clinical history on radiographic detection of fractures: a comparison of radiologists and orthopedists. AJR 1989;153:1221-1224. 


Berbaum KS, Smith WL. Use of reports of previous radiologic studies. Acad Rad 1998;5:111-114. 

Carmody DP. Free search, restricted search, & the need for context in radiologic image perception. In R Groner et al. (Eds). Eye Movements & Human Information Processing. Amsterdam, Netherlands, Elsevier Science, 341-355,1985. 

Carmody DP et al. Global & segmented search for lung nodules of different edge gradients. Invest Rad 1980;15:224-233. 

Cooperstein LA et al. The effect of clinical history on chest radiograph interpretation in a PACS environment. Invest Rad 1990;25:670-674. 

Egglin TKP & Feinstein AR. Context bias: a problem in diagnostic radiology. JAMA 1996;276:1752-1755. 

Getty D. Every little bit helps: adjunctive contributions of demographic, clinical, histologic and imaging variables to the accuracy of prostate cancer staging. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Good BC et al. Does knowledge of the clinical history affect the accuracy of chest radiograph interpretation? AJR 1990;154:709-712. 

Gottlieb RH, Hollenberg GM, Fultz PJ, Rubens DJ. Radiolgic consultation: effect on inpatient diagnostic imaging evaluation in a teaching hospital. Acad Radiol 1997;4:217-221. 

Hartswood M, et al. Prompting in practice: how can we ensure radiologists make best use of computer-aided detection systems in screening mammography. 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands.

Heddle S, Hume AC, et al. Evaluation of a prompting system using interval cancers. 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands

Hutt IW et al. Prompting as an aid to diagnosis in mammography. In AG Gale et al. (eds). Digital Mammography. NY, Elsevier Science, 389-398,1994. 


Kundel HL & Wright DJ. The influence of prior knowledge on visual search strategies during the viewing of chest radiographs. Radiology 1969;93:315-320. 

Mugglestone MD et al. The effect of prompting mammographic abnormalities on the human observer. In K Doi et al. (eds). Digital Mammography '96. NY, Elsevier Science, 87-96,1996. 


Mugglestone M, Gale A. CAD implementation: implications from real life visual search of screening cases. 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands.

Parker TW et al. Directed vs free search for nodules in chest radiographs. Invest Rad 1982;2:152-155.

Swensson RG et al. Radiographic interpretations with & without search : visual search aids the recognition of chest pathology. Invest Rad 1982;17:145-153.

Swensson RG & Theodore GH. Search & nonsearch protocols for radiographic consultation. Radiology 1990;177:851-856.

Swensson RG et al. The value of searching films without specific preconceptions. Invest Rad 1985;20:100-107.

Swensson RG et al. Omission in radiology: faulty search or stringent reporting criteria? Radiology 1977;123:563-567.

T-SCOPE STUDIES

Kundel HL & Nodine CF. Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search. Radiology 1975;116:527-532.

Mugglestone MD et al. Diagnostic performance on briefly presented mammographic images. SPIE Med Imaging 1995;2436:106-115.

TELERADIOLOGY, PACS & TELEMEDICINE

Bolle SR, Sund T, Stromer J. Receiver operating characteristic study of image preprocessing for teleradiology and digital workstations. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:152-157. 

Franken EA, Harkens KL, Berbaum KS. Teleradiology consultation for a rural hospital: patterns of use. Acad Radiol 1997;4:492-496.

Frost M, Staab EV. Displays: contrast and spatial requirements. Invest Radiol 1989;24:95-98. 


Larson A, Lynch DA, Zeligman B, et al. Accuracy of diagnosis of subtle chest disease and subtle fractures with a teleradiology system. AJR 1997;170:19-22. 

Lyttkens K, Kirkhorn T, Kehler M, et al. Evaluation of the image quality of ink-jet printed paper copies of digital chest radiographs as compared with film: a receiver operating characteristic study. J Dig Imaging 1994;7:61-68. 

Rogers DC, Johnston RE, Pizer SM. Effect of ambient light on electronically displayed medical images as measured by luminance-discrimination thresholds. JOSA 1987;4:976-983. 


Rosenthal MS, Good WF, Costa-Greco MA, et al. The effect of image processing on chest radiograph interpretations in a PACS environment. Invest Radiol 1990;25:897-901. 

Wang J, Langer S. A brief review of human perception factors in digital displays for picture archiving and communications systems. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:158-168.

Washowich TL, Williams SC, Richardson LA, et al. Detection of interstitial lung abnormalities on picture archiving and communication system video monitors. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:34-39.


SIGNAL DETECTION & NOISE

Burgess A. Signal detection with two component noise: part 1 - methods and results. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Burgess A. Signal detection with two component noise: part 2 - interpretation. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.


Burgess A. Observer internal noise with two component image noise. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Eckstein MP, Whiting JS. Lesion detection in structured noise. Acad Radiol 1995;2:249-253.

Eckstein M, et al. Effect of signal to noise ratio on the relation between saccadic targeting and perceptual decision accuracy for visual search in white noise. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Echstein M, et al. Internal vs external sources of performance degradation in human visual detection in backgrounds. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

DETECTION IN DEGRADED IMAGES

Erickson BJ, Manduca A, Persons KR, et al. Evaluation of irreversible compression of digitized posterior-anterior chest radiographs. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:97-102. 

Fisher PD, Brauer GW.. Impact of image size on effectiveness of digital imaging syatems. J Dig Imaging 1989;2:39-41. 

Gardner EA, Ellis JH, Hyde RJ, Aisen AM, Quint DJ, Carson PL. Detection of degradation of magnetic resonance (MR) images: comparison of an automated MR image-quality analysis system with trained human observers. Acad Radiol 1995;2:277-281.

Kim B, Lee KH, Kim KJ, Mantiuk R, Bajpai V, Kim TJ, Kim YH, Yoon CJ, Hahn S. Prediction of perceptible artifacts in JPEG2000 compressed abdomen CT images using a perceptual image quality metric. Acad Radiol 2007 in publish

Kim B, Lee KH, Kim KJ, Mantiuk R, Hahn S, Kim TJ, Kim YH. Prediction of perceptible artifacts in JPEG2000 compressed chest CT images using mathematical and perceptual quality metrics. Am J Roentgenol 2007 in publish

Kim KJ, Kim B, Choi SW, Kim YH, Hahn S, Kim TJ, Cha SJ, Bajpai V, Lee KH. Definition of compression ratio: difference between two commercial JPEG2000 program libraries. Telemed J E Health 2007 in publish

Kim TJ, Lee KH, Kim B, Kim KJ, Chun EJ, Bajpai V, Kim YH, Hahn S, Lee KW. Regional variance of visually lossless threshold in compressed chest CT images: lung versus mediastinum and chest wall. Eur J Radiol 2007 in publish


Krupinski EA, Alsafadi Y. Observer detection performance in radiology using a retransmission free network communication protocol. Acad Radiol 1994;1:333-338.

Misra B, et al. Acceptable compression levels of chest CR images. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18, 1997.

Roehrig H, Krupinski EA, Hulett R. Reduction of patient exposure in pediatric radiology. Acad Radiol 1997;4:547-557.

Schaefer CM, Prokop M, Oestmann JW, et al. Impact of hard-copy size on observer performance in digital chest radiography. Radiol 1992;184:77-81.


MOTION IN RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGES

Lund PJ, Krupinski EA, Brooks WJ. Ultrasound evaluation of sacroiliac motion in normal volunteers. Acad Radiol 1996;3:192-196.

Wilson D, et al. Eye-tracking of moving objects in x-ray fluouroscopy enhances detectability. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

MRI IMAGING

King MA, Bergin CJ, Ghadishah E, Yi ES, Clark JB. Detecting pulmonary abnormalities on magnetic resonance images in patients with usual interstitial pneumonitis: effect of varying window settings and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Acad Radiol 1996;3:300-307.

Lai SH, Fang M. Robust and automatic adjustment of display-window width and center for MR images. SPIE 1998;3340:105-116.

CT IMAGING

El-saden SM, Hademenos GJ, Zhu W, Sayre JW, Glenn B, Steidler J, et al. Assessment of intraaxial and extraaxial brain lesions with digitized computed tomography images versus film: ROC analysis. Acad Radiol 1997;4:90-95.

Seltzer SE, Cavanagh P, Judy PF, Swensson RG, Scarff L, Monsky W. Enhanced displays of medical images: evaluation of the effectiveness of color, motion, and contour for detecting and localizing liver lesions. Acad Radiol 1995;2:748-755. 

Seltzer SE, Judy PF, Feldman U, Scarff L, Jacobson FL. Influence of CT image size and format on accuracy of lung nodule detection. Radiology 1998;206:617-622. 
Swensson RG, Judy PF, Wester C, Seltzer SE. Nodule polarity effects on detection and localization performance in liver CT images. SPIE Proceedings 1997;3036:85-93.

Wester C, Judy PF, Polger M, Swensson RG, Feldman U, Seltzer SE. Influence of visual distractors on detectability of liver nodules on contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomography scans. Acad Radiol 1997;4:335-342.


CR & OTHER DIGITAL IMAGES

Britton CA, Gabriele OF, Chang TS, et al. Subjective quality assessment of computed radiography hand images. J Dig Imaging 1996;9:21-24. 

Floyd CE, Baker JA, Chotas HG, Delong DM, Ravin CE. Selenium-based digital radiography of the chest: radiologists' preference compared with film-scren radiographs. AJR 1995;165:1353-1358. 

Huda W, Belden CJ, Webb LA, Palmer CK. Support line and tube visibility in chest examinations using computed radiography. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:126-131. 

Ishigaki T, Endo T, Ikeda M, et al. Subtle pulmonary disease: detection with computed radiography versus conventional chest radiography. Radiol 1996;210:51-60. 

Kimme-Smith C, Hart EM, Goldin JG, Johnson TD, Terwilliger R, Aberle DR. Detection of simulated lung nodules with computed radiography: effects of nodule size, local optical density, global object thickness, and exposure. Acad Radiol 1996;3:735-741. 

Kundel HL, Polansky M. Mixture distribution and receiver operating characteristic analysis of bedside chest imaging with screen-film and computed radiography. Acad Radiol 1997;4:1-7.

Langen HJ, Klein HM, Wein B, et al. Comparative evaluation of digital radiography versus conventional radiography of fractured skulls. Invest Radiol 1993;28:686-689. 


O'Connor PJ, Davies AG, Fowler RC, et al. Reporting requirements for skeletal digital radiography: comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy presentation. Radiol 1998;207:249-254. 

Otto D, Bernhardt TM, Rapp-Bernhardt, et al. Subtle pulmonary abnormalities: detection on monitors with varying spatial resolutions and maximum luminance compared with detection on storage phosphor radiographic hard copies. Radiol 1998;207:237-242. 

Reiner B, Siegel E, McLaurin, et al. Evaluation of soft-tissue foreign bodies: comparing conventional plain film radiography, computed radiography printed on film, and computed radiography displayed on a computer workstation. AJR 1996;167:141-144.

Schefer-Prokop CM, Prokop M, Schmidt A, et al. Selenium radiography versus storage phosphor and conventional radiography ijn the detction of simulated chest lesions. Radiol 1996;201:45-50. 

Swee RG, Gray JE, Beabout JE, et al. Screen-film versus computed radiography imaging of the hand: a direct comparison. AJR 1997;168:539-542.


IMAGE QUALITY & IDEAL OBSERVER MODELS


Abbey C. Human and model observer performance in simulated tomographic-reconstruction noise. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Ahumada AJ, Null CH. Image quality: a multidimensional problem. SID Digest 1992:851-870. 

Barrett HH, Denny JL, Gifford HC, Abbey CK. Generalized NEQ: Fourier analysis where you would least expect to find it. SPIE 1996;2708:41-52. 

Barrett HH. Objective assessment of image quality: effects of quantum noise and object variability. JOSA 1990;7:1266-1278

Barrett HH, Abbey CK, Gallas B, Eckstein MP. Stabilized estimates of Hotelling-observer detection performance in patient-structured noise. SPIE 1998;3340:27-43. 


Barrett HH, Abbey CK, Clarkson E. Some unlikely properties of the likelihood ratio and its logarithm. SPIE 1998;3340:65-77. 

Burgess A. Image quality, the ideal observer, and human performance of radiologic decision tasks. Acad Radiol 1995;2:522-526.


Burgess AE. Prewhitening revisited. SPIE 1998;3340:55-64. 


Chakraborty DP. Comparison of computer analysis of mammography phantom images (CAMPI) with perceived imasge quality of phantom targets in the ACR phantom. SPIE 1997;3036:160-167. 

Chakraborty DP. Computer analysis of mammography phantom images (CAMPI). SPIE 1997;3032:292-299. 

Chakraborty DP. Physical measures of image quality in mammography. SPIE 1996;2708:179-193. 

Chakraborty DP, Eckert MP. Quantitative versus subjective evaluation of mammography accreditation phantom images. Med Phys 1995;22:133-143. 

Eckstein MP, Abbey CK, Whiting JS. Human vs model observers in anatomic backgrounds. SPIE 1998; 3340:16-26. 


Fiete RD, Barrett HH, Smith WE, Myers KJ. Hotelling trace criterion and its correlation with human-observer performance. JOSA 1987;4:945-953. 


Fiete RD, Barrett HH. Using the Hotelling trace criterion for feature enhancement in image processing. Optics Letters 1987;12:643-645. 

Fiete RD, Barrett HH, Cargill EB, Myers KJ, Smith WE. Psychophysical validation of the Hotelling trace criterion as a metric for system performance. SPIE 1987;767:298-305.

Flask CA, K.A. Salem, H. Moriguchi, J.S. Lewin, D.L. Wilson, and J.L. Duerk, “Keyhole Dixon method for faster, perceptually equivalent fat suppression,” JMRI, Vol. 18, Issue 1,pp. 103-112, 2003.

Good WF, Gur D, Feist JH, et al. Subjective and objective assessment of image quality - a comparison. J Dig Imaging 1994;7:77-78. 

Gur D, Rubin DA, Kart BH et al. Forced choice and ordinal discrete rating assessment of image quality: a comparison. J Dig Imaging 1997;10:103-107. 

Huo D, Xu D, Liang ZP and Wilson DL, “Application of Perceptual Difference Model (PDM) on Regularization Techniques of Parallel MR Imaging,” Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 24, Issue. 2, pp. 123-132. 2006. PMID: 16455401.

Huo D, Kyle A. Salem, Yuhao Jiang, “Optimization of Spiral MRI Using a Perceptual Difference Model,” and David L. Wilson. International Journal of Biomedical Imaging Volume 2006, Article ID 35290, 11 pages. 2006.

Huo D and D.L. Wilson, “Robust GRAPPA reconstruction and its evaluation with the perceptual difference model,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 27, pp. 1412-1420, 2008.

Huo D, K.A. Salem, and D.L. Wilson, “Quantitative image quality evaluation of spiral MRI techniques under noisy conditions,” Proc. SPIE 5372, 283 (2004).

Huo D, D. Xu, L. Ying, Z. Liang, and D.L. Wilson, “Application of perceptual difference model (PDM) on regularization techniques of parallel MR imaging,” Proc. SPIE 5749, 476 (2005).

Huo D and D.L. Wilson, “Using perceptual difference model to improve GRAPPA reconstruction in MRI,” Proc. SPIE 6146, 61460L (2006).

Huo D and D.L. Wilson, “Robust GRAPPA reconstruction and its evaluation with perceptual difference model (PDM),” Proc. ISMRM, 14, 3648 (2006).

Huo D, D.L. Wilson, K.A. Salem, and H. Moriguchi, “Evaluation of noise effects in spiral MRI image reconstruction using the perceptual difference model (PDM),” Proc. 25th IEEE EBMES, Cancun, Mexico, September 17th-21st, 2003.

Huo Dand D.L. Wilson, “Using the perceptual difference model (PDM) to optimize GRAPPA reconstruction,” Proc. 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference, Shanghai, China, September 1-4, 2005.

Jabri K, et al. Quantitative image quality of spatial versus temporal low-pass filtering. Far West Image Perception Conference; Tucson, AZ; Oct 16-18,1997.

Jabri KN and D.L. Wilson, “Quantitative assessment of image quality enhancement due to unsharp-mask processing in x-ray fluoroscopy,” J Opt Soc Am Opt Image Sci Vis., Vol. 19(7), pp. 1297-1307, 2002.

Jiang Y and D.L. Wilson, “Optimization of detector pixel size for stent visualization in x-ray fluoroscopy,” Medical Physics, Vol. 33(3), pp. 668-678, 2006.

Jiang Y, D. Huo, and D. L. Wilson, “Methods for quantitative image quality evaluation of MRI parallel reconstructions: Detection and perceptual difference model,” Magn. Reson. Imaging. 25, 712–721 (2007).

Jiang Y, D. Huo, and D.L. Wilson, “Parallel reconstructions of MRI: Evaluation using detection and perceptual difference studies,” Proc. SPIE 6146, 61460K (2006).


Lopez H. Characterizing the performance of diagnostic imaging systems. Acad Radiol 1995;2:634-637.

Lubin J. A human vision model for filmless radiology system design and optimization. J Dig Imaging 1998;11:179.

Miao J, D. Huo and D.L. Wilson, “Quantitative image quality evaluation of MR images using perceptual difference models,” Medical Physics, Vol. 35, pp. 2541-2553, 2008.

Miao J, D. Huo, and D.L. Wilson, “Perceptual difference model (Case-PDM) for evaluation of MR images: validation and calibration,” Proc. SPIE 6515, 651515 (2007).

Miao J, W.C. Wong, and D.L. Wilson, “Weighted perceptual difference model (Case-PDM) for MR image quality evaluation,” Proc. SPIE 6917, 69170L (2008).

Miao Jand D.L. Wilson, “Selective evaluation of noise, blur, and aliasing artifacts in fast MRI reconstructions using a weighted perceptual difference model (Case-PDM),” Proc. SPIE 7263, 72631N (2009).

Miao J, D. Huo, and D.L. Wilson, “Geographically weighted GRAPPA reconstruction and its evaluation with perceptual difference model (Case-PDM),” abstract #3019, ISMRM 2007.

Miao J, F. Huang, and D.L. Wilson, “Case-PDM optimized random acquisition in high quality compressed sensing MR image reconstruction,” abstract #3999, ISMRM 2009.

Myers KJ, Rolland JP, Barrett HH, Wagner RF. Aperture optimization for emission imaging: effect of a spatially varying background. JOSA 1990;7:1279-1293. 

Myers KJ, Barrett HH. Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model. JOSA 1987;4:2447-2457. 

 Overington I. Image quality and observer performance. SPIE 1981;310:2-9. 

Roehrig H, Yu T, Krupinski EA. Image quality control for digital mammographic systems: initial experience and outlook. J. Dig Imaging 1995;8:52-66.

Rolland JP, Goon A, Clarkson E, Yu L. Synthesis of biomedical tissue. SPIE 1998;3340:85-91. 

Rolland JP, Barrett HH, Seeley GW. Quantitative study of deconvolution and display mappings for long-tailed point-spread functions. SPIE 1989;1092:17-21. 

Salem KA, J. S. Lewin, A. J. Aschoff, J. L. Duerk, and D. L. Wilson, “Validation of a human vision model for image quality evaluation of fast interventional magnetic resonance imaging,” J. Electron. Imaging 11, 224–235 (2002).

Salem KA, and D.L. Wilson, “Human vision model for the objective evaluation of perceived image quality applied to MRI and image restoration,” Proc. SPIE 4791, 180 (2002).

Salem KA, H. Moriguchi, J.L. Duerk, and D.L. Wilson, “Optimization of noisy nonuniform sampling and image reconstruction for fast MRI using a human vision model,” Proc. SPIE 4324, 82 (2001).

Salem KA, and D.L. Wilson, “Human vision model for the objective evaluation of perceived image quality applied to MRI and image restoration,” Proc. SPIE 4791, 180 (2002).

Salem KA, J.L. Duerk, M. Wendt, J.S. Lewin, A.J. Aschoff, and D.L. Wilson, “Validation and application of a perceptual difference model for Keyhole MR imaging,” Proc. ISMRM, 8, 1556 (2000).

Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler WR, Peterson E. Effect of local background anatomical patterns on the detection of subtle lung nodules in chest radiographs. SPIE 1998;3340:44-54. 

Sriniva Y and D.L. Wilson, “Image quality evaluation of flat panel and image intensifier digital magnification in x-ray fluoroscopy,” Medical Physics, Vol. 29(7), pp. 1611-1621, 2002.

van Overveld IMCJ. Contrast, noise, and blur affect performance and appreciation of digital radiographs. J Dig Imaging 1995;8:168-179.

Wilson DL, K.A. Salem, D. Huo, and J.L. Duerk, “Perceptual difference paradigm for analyzing image quality of fast MRI techniques,” Proc. SPIE 5034, 297 (2003).



PERCEPTUAL LINEARIZATION

Christensen EE et al.  The effect of search time on perception. Radiology 1981;138:361-365. 

Hemminger BM, Johnston RE, Rolland JP, Muller KE. Introduction to perceptual linearization of video display systems for medical image perception. J Dig Imaging 1995;8:21-43.

Krupinski EA. Differences in viewing time for mammograms displayed on film vs a CRT monitor. 4th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, June 7 - 10, 1998; The Netherlands.


Oestmann JW et al. Lung lesions: correlation between viewing time & detection. Radiology 1988;166:451-453. 

Pizer SM. Intensity mappings: linearization, image-based, user-controlled. SPIE 1981;271:21-27.

Pizer SM. Intensity mappings to linearize display devices. Comp Graphics & Image Processing 1981;17:262-268.

SEMIOTICS

Cantor, Robert M. (2000). Foundations of Roentgen semiotics. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 131, 1-18.

Cantor, Robert M. (2002). A pragmatic typology of Roentgen signs. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 141, 29-41.

Cantor, Robert M. (2003). Verisimilitude in Roentgen semiotics. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 144, 19-32.

Cantor, Robert M. (2003). Roentgen semiotic grammar. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 146, 69-79.

Cantor, Robert M. (2004). Diagnostic logic in Roentgen semiotics. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 149, 361-376.

Cantor, Robert M. (2005). Semiotic error in Roentgen diagnosis. Semiotica: Journal of The International Association for Semiotic Studies 154, 1-10.

Cantor, Robert M. (2006). The semiotics of 'difference' in Roentgen diagnosis. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies. 158, 297- 308.

Cantor, Robert M. (2006). The effects of Roentgen signs on the mind of the interpreter. Semiotica: Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies 162, 309-321.


Return to MIPS home page