Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Journal of Digital I...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Digital Imaging
Article . 2000 . Peer-reviewed
License: Springer TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Image compression and chest radiograph interpretation: Image perception comparison between uncompressed chest radiographs and chest radiographs stored using 10∶1 JPEG compression

Authors: Bill Carpenter; Brian J. Fortman; Thomas V. Kinsey; Phillip D. Shelton; Douglas P. Beall; John T. Gironda; Maria C. Horton; +3 Authors

Image compression and chest radiograph interpretation: Image perception comparison between uncompressed chest radiographs and chest radiographs stored using 10∶1 JPEG compression

Abstract

We have assessed the effect of 10:1 lossy (JPEG) compression on six board-certified radiologists' ability to detect three commonly seen abnormalities on chest radiographs. The study radiographs included 150 chest radiographs with one of four diagnoses: normal (n = 101), pulmonary nodule (n = 19), interstitial lung disease (n = 19), and pneumothorax (n = 11). Before compression, these images were printed on laser film and interpreted in a blinded fashion by six radiologists. Following an 8-week interval, the images were reinterpreted on an image display workstation after undergoing 10:1 lossy compression. The results for the compressed images were compared with those of the uncompressed images using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. For five of six readers, the diagnostic accuracy was higher for the uncompressed images than for the compressed images, but the difference was not significant (P > .1111). Combined readings for the uncompressed images were also more accurate when compared with the compressed images, but this difference was also not significant (P = .1430). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values were 81.5%, 89.2%, and 86.7% for the compressed images, respectively, as compared with 78.9%, 94.5%, and 89.3% for the uncompressed images. There was no correlation between the readers' accuracy and their experience with soft-copy interpretation; the extent of radiographic interpretation experience had no correlation with overall interpretation accuracy. In conclusion, five of six radiologists had a higher diagnostic accuracy when interpreting uncompressed chest radiographs versus the same images modified by 10:1 lossy compression, but this difference was not statistically significant.

Keywords

Radiography, Radiology Information Systems, ROC Curve, Pulmonary Fibrosis, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Humans, Pneumothorax, Reproducibility of Results, Solitary Pulmonary Nodule

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    15
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
15
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
bronze