Matt Latourelle excels in his presentation of the Christian views of devout CS Lewis of Chronicles o...
Complete video at: fora.tv Author Sudhir Venkatesh reads an excerpt from his book, "Gang Leader for ...
Demonstrates the lightning disc on a class II slice preparation. Orig. air date: OCT 26 73
A new, advanced CT scanner at MUSC is enabling some patients to avoid an invasive cardiac catheteriz...
In this tutorial I'll teach you how to slice a website design from Photoshop and then export it to D...
IEEE |
(0) (0 Votes)
|
Views: (2003) Date: (Publication Date: Jun 2000) Pages: () |
Abstract: Abstract Use of a single-slice (2D) display for observer studies may bias results acid reduce the studies' clinical generalizability. Human observers perform better at the task of lesion detection with 3D-processed images than they do with 2D-processed images when the images are presented using a 2D display. However, 3D-processing techniques incorporate information from out-of-plane or adjacent slices into an image and thus provide more information to the observer than does a similar 2D-processing method. Observer performance with 2D-processing methods may improve if the adjacent-slice information is provided by way of a multi-slice (3D) display. 3D processing also introduces 3D distracters which may not be present with 2D processing. The authors investigated, with a human-observer LROC study, the impact of 2D versus 3D display on FBP and OSEM reconstruction followed by 2D and 3D filtering. Three display modes were used: single-slice, multi-slice, and multi-slice with cine. The emulated clinical task was the detection and localization of small gallium lesions in thoracic SPECT scans. Results indicate that 3D display generally improves performance over the 2D display, as measured by the area under the LROC curve and the probability of correct localization. The improvement is greater for 2D-than for 3D-filtered reconstruction, leading to a reduction in the significance of the differences between them