Clinical Evaluation of a Dual-Side Readout Technique Computed Radiography System in Chest Radiography of Premature Neonates

References

• Fetterly KA, Schueler BA. Performance of a “dual-side read” dedicated mammography computed radiography system. Med Phys 2003; 30: 1843–54
   Google Scholar
• Monnin P, Holzer Z, Wolf R, Neitzel U, Vock P, Gudinchet F, et al. An image quality comparison of standard and dual-side read CR systems for pediatric radiology. Med Phys 2006; 33: 411–20
   Google Scholar
• Monnin P, Holzer Z, Wolf R, Neitzel U, Vock P, Gudinchet F, et al. Influence of cassette type on the DQE of CR systems. Med Phys 2006; 33: 3637–9
   Google Scholar
• Fetterly KA, Schueler BA. Performance evaluation of a computed radiography imaging device using a typical “front side” and novel “dual side” readout storage phosphors. Med Phys 2006; 33: 290–6
   Google Scholar
• Monnin P, Gutierrez D, Bulling S, Guntern D, Verdun FR. A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems. Med Phys 2007; 34: 906–14
   Google Scholar
• Riccardi L, Cauzzo MC, Fabbris R, Tonini E, Righetto R. Comparison between a built-in “dual side” chest imaging device and a standard “single side” CR. Med Phys 2007; 34: 119–26
   Google Scholar
• Sund P, Båth M, Kheddache S, Månsson LG. Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography. Eur Radiol 2004; 14: 48–58
   Google Scholar
• Samei, E, Eyler, W, Baron, L. Effects of anatomical structure on signal detection. In: J Beutel, Kundel, HL, Van Metter, RL. Handbook of medical imaging. Volume 1. Physics and psychophysics. Bellingham: SPIE Press; 2000. p. 655–82.
   Google Scholar
• Bochud FO, Valley J-F, Verdun FR, Hessler C, Schnyder P. Estimation of the noisy component of anatomical backgrounds. Med Phys 1999; 26: 1365–70
   Google Scholar
• Burgess AE, Jacobson FL, Judy PF. Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. Med Phys 2001; 28: 419–37
   Google Scholar
• Ruschin M, Timberg P, Båth M, Hemdal B, Svahn T, Saunders RS, et al. Dose dependence of mass and microcalcification detection in digital mammography: free response human observer studies. Med Phys 2007; 34: 400–7
   Google Scholar
• Tingberg A, Båth M, Håkansson M, Medin J, Besjakov J, Sandborg M, et al. Evaluation of image quality of lumbar spine images: a comparison between FFE and VGA. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 53–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tingberg A, Båth M, Ruschin M, Grahn A, Besjakov J, Börjesson S, et al. Detectability of pathological lesions in lumbar spine radiography. Proc SPIE 2005; 5749: 518–26
   Google Scholar
• Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler WR. Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs. Radiology 1999; 213: 727–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Båth M, Håkansson M, Börjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Ruschin M, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: introduction to the RADIUS chest trial. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 85–91
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson M, Båth M, Börjesson S, Kheddache S, Flinck A, Ullman G, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: effect of nodule location. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 92–6
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson M, Båth M, Börjesson S, Kheddache S, Allansdotter Johnsson Å, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: effect of system noise. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 97–101
   Google Scholar
• Båth M, Håkansson M, Börjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Bochud FO, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: part of image background acting as pure noise. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 102–8
   Google Scholar
• Båth M, Håkansson M, Börjesson S, Hoeschen C, Tischenko O, Kheddache S, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: effect of anatomical noise. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 109–13
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson M, Båth M, Börjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Ruschin M, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: summary of the RADIUS chest trial. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 114–20
   Google Scholar
• ICRP. ICRP publication 60: 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP. 1991;21.
   Google Scholar
• Hansson J, Båth M, Håkansson M, Grundin H, Bjurklint E, Orvestad P, et al. An optimisation strategy in a digital environment applied to neonatal chest imaging. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 278–85
   Google Scholar
• Båth M, Månsson LG. Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation. Br J Radiol 2007; 80: 169–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CEC. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images in paediatrics. Report EUR 16261 EN. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Börjesson S, Håkansson M, Båth M, Kheddache S, Svensson S, Tingberg A, et al. A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 45–52
   Google Scholar
• Båth M, Håkansson M, Hansson J, Månsson LG. A conceptual optimisation strategy for radiography in a digital environment. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114: 230–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar