A comparison of perceived diagnostic image quality in direct digital panoramic images between standard and advanced external GOP image processing

References

• Mouyen F, Benz C, Sonnabend E, et al. Presentation and physical evaluation of RadioVisioGraphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1989;68:238–242.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baksi B, Alpoz E, Sogur E, et al. Perception of anatomical structures in digitally filtered and conventional panoramic radiographs: a clinical evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39:424–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenson B, Ståhlnacke K, Karlsson R, et al. Dentists’ use of digital radiographic techniques: part II – extraoral radiography: a questionnaire study of Swedish dentists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2019;77:150–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, et al. Effective dosages for recording Veraviewepocs dental panoramic images: analog film, digital, and panoramic scout for CBCT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106:571–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaeppler G, Dietz K, Reinert S. The effect of dose reduction on the detection of anatomical structures on panoramic radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:271–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yalcinkaya S, Kunzel A, Willers R, et al. Subjective image quality of digitally filtered radiographs acquired by the Dürr Vistascan system compared with conventional radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;101:643–651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabarudin A, Tiau Y. Image quality assessment in panoramic dental radiography: a comparative study between conventional and digital systems. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2013;3:43–48.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van der Stelt P. Better imaging: the advantages of digital radiography. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139 Suppl:7S–13S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geijer H. Radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic radiology. Optimization of the dose-image quality relationship with clinical experience from scoliosis radiography, coronary intervention and a flat-panel digital detector. Acta Radiol Suppl. 2002;43:1–43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Prokop M, Neitzel U, Schaefer-Prokop C. Principles of image processing in digital chest radiography. J Thorac Imaging. 2003;18:148–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Analoui M. Radiographic image enhancement. Part I: spatial domain techniques. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2001;30:1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Analoui M, Buckwalter K. Digital radiographic image archival, retrieval, and management. Dent Clin North Am. 2000;44:339–358, vi–vii.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eickholz P, Kolb I, Lenhard M, et al. Digital radiography of interproximal caries: effect of different filters. Caries Res. 1999;33:234–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gijbels F, De Meyer A, Bou Serhal C, et al. The subjective image quality of direct digital and conventional panoramic radiography. Clin Oral Investig. 2000;4:162–167.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Farman T, Farman A. Clinical trial of panoramic dental radiography using a CCD receptor. J Digit Imaging. 1998;11:169–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelopoulos C, Bedard A, Katz JO, et al. Digital panoramic radiography: an overview. Semin Orthod. 2004;10:194–203.
   Google Scholar
• Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB, Platin E, et al. A comparison of Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film and the Siemens Sidexis digital imaging system for caries detection using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;85:113–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Context Vision AB. The GOP technology. Available on http://www.contextvision.com/technology/gop-technology/.
   Google Scholar
• Svenson B, Båth M, Karlsson R. Can adaptive post-processing of storage phosphor plate panoramic radiographs provide better image quality? A comparison of anatomical image quality of panoramic radiographs before and after adaptive processing. Acta Odontol Scand. 2019;77:328–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenson B, Larsson L, Båth M. Optimization of exposure in panoramic radiography while maintaining image quality using adaptive filtering. Acta Odontol Scand. 2016;74:229–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Håkansson M, Svensson S, Zachrisson S, et al. VIEWDEX: an efficient and easy-to-use software for observer performance studies. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010;139:42–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svalkvist A, Svensson S, Hakansson M, et al. Viewdex: a status report. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016;169:38–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Båth M. Evaluating imaging systems: practical applications. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010;139:26–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Båth M, Månsson L-G. Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation. Bjr. 2007;80:169–176.
   Google Scholar
• Båth M, Hansson J. Vgc Analyzer: a software for statistical analysis of fully crossed multiple-reader multiple-case visual grading characteristics studies. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016;169:46–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansson J, Mansson LG, Bath M. The validity of using Roc software for analysing visual grading characteristics data: an investigation based on the novel software Vgc analyzer. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016;169:54–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elff M. Social divisions, party positions, and electoral behaviour. Elect Stud. 2009;28:297–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dannewitz B, Hassfeld S, Eickholz P, et al. Effect of dose reduction in digital dental panoramic radiography on image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;31:50–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White S, Pharoah M. Panoramic imaging. In: Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2014. p. 166–184.
   Google Scholar
• Molander B, Grondahl HG, Ekestubbe A. Quality of film-based and digital panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:32–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45:263–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images. Luxembourg: European Commission. EUR 16260 EN; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Martin C. Optimisation in general radiography. Biomed Imaging Interv J. 2007;3:e18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haring J, Jensen L. Normal anatomy-intraoral films. Dental radiology principles and techniques. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 2000. p. 433–434.
   Google Scholar
• Whaites E. The radiographic image. In: Essentials of dental radiography and radiology. 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2002. p. 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• ContextVision AB. Digital radiography. GOPView XR2Plus. Available from: https://media.contextvision.com/2018/10/CoV-DR.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Shrout MK, Russell CM, Potter BJ, et al. Digital enhancement of radiographs: can it improve caries diagnosis? J Am Dent Assoc. 1996;127:469–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol A. Digital quantitative radiography: tools and toys. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28:328–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar