Expert interpretation compensates for reduced image quality of camera-digitized images referred to radiologists

Allison Zwingenberger, Jennifer L. Bouma, H. Mark Saunders, Calvin F. Nodine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We compared the accuracy of five veterinary radiologists when reading 20 radiographic cases on both analog film and in camera-digitized format. In addition, we compared the ability of five veterinary radiologists vs. 10 private practice veterinarians to interpret the analog images. Interpretation accuracy was compared using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Veterinary radiologists' accuracy did not significantly differ between analog vs. camera-digitized images (P=0.13) although sensitivity was higher for analog images. Radiologists' interpretation of both digital and analog images was significantly better compared with the private veterinarians (P<0.05).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)591-595
Number of pages5
JournalVeterinary Radiology and Ultrasound
Volume52
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

cameras
veterinarians
Veterinarians
Private Practice
Motion Pictures
ROC Curve
Reading
Radiologists

Keywords

  • Digital image
  • Image quality
  • ROC
  • Teleradiology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • veterinary(all)

Cite this

Expert interpretation compensates for reduced image quality of camera-digitized images referred to radiologists. / Zwingenberger, Allison; Bouma, Jennifer L.; Saunders, H. Mark; Nodine, Calvin F.

In: Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound, Vol. 52, No. 6, 11.2011, p. 591-595.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5b9fb78a07c64984bc17b6909f595e3a,
title = "Expert interpretation compensates for reduced image quality of camera-digitized images referred to radiologists",
abstract = "We compared the accuracy of five veterinary radiologists when reading 20 radiographic cases on both analog film and in camera-digitized format. In addition, we compared the ability of five veterinary radiologists vs. 10 private practice veterinarians to interpret the analog images. Interpretation accuracy was compared using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Veterinary radiologists' accuracy did not significantly differ between analog vs. camera-digitized images (P=0.13) although sensitivity was higher for analog images. Radiologists' interpretation of both digital and analog images was significantly better compared with the private veterinarians (P<0.05).",
keywords = "Digital image, Image quality, ROC, Teleradiology",
author = "Allison Zwingenberger and Bouma, {Jennifer L.} and Saunders, {H. Mark} and Nodine, {Calvin F.}",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1111/j.1740-8261.2011.01836.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "591--595",
journal = "Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound",
issn = "1058-8183",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Expert interpretation compensates for reduced image quality of camera-digitized images referred to radiologists

AU - Zwingenberger, Allison

AU - Bouma, Jennifer L.

AU - Saunders, H. Mark

AU - Nodine, Calvin F.

PY - 2011/11

Y1 - 2011/11

N2 - We compared the accuracy of five veterinary radiologists when reading 20 radiographic cases on both analog film and in camera-digitized format. In addition, we compared the ability of five veterinary radiologists vs. 10 private practice veterinarians to interpret the analog images. Interpretation accuracy was compared using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Veterinary radiologists' accuracy did not significantly differ between analog vs. camera-digitized images (P=0.13) although sensitivity was higher for analog images. Radiologists' interpretation of both digital and analog images was significantly better compared with the private veterinarians (P<0.05).

AB - We compared the accuracy of five veterinary radiologists when reading 20 radiographic cases on both analog film and in camera-digitized format. In addition, we compared the ability of five veterinary radiologists vs. 10 private practice veterinarians to interpret the analog images. Interpretation accuracy was compared using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Veterinary radiologists' accuracy did not significantly differ between analog vs. camera-digitized images (P=0.13) although sensitivity was higher for analog images. Radiologists' interpretation of both digital and analog images was significantly better compared with the private veterinarians (P<0.05).

KW - Digital image

KW - Image quality

KW - ROC

KW - Teleradiology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861109736&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861109736&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2011.01836.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2011.01836.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21831251

AN - SCOPUS:84861109736

VL - 52

SP - 591

EP - 595

JO - Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound

JF - Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound

SN - 1058-8183

IS - 6

ER -