New standards for phantom image quality and SUV harmonization range for multicenter oncology PET studies

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Go Akamatsu ◽  
Naoki Shimada ◽  
Keiichi Matsumoto ◽  
Hiromitsu Daisaki ◽  
Kazufumi Suzuki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Phantom Image

Objective assessment of phantom image quality in mammography: a feasibility study.

1998 ◽  
Vol 71 (841) ◽  
pp. 48-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
A D Castellano Smith ◽  
I A Castellano Smith ◽  
D R Dance
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Phantom Image

Effect of Detector Noise on Phantom Image Quality in a Number of FFDM Systems

2003 ◽  
pp. 95-99
Author(s):  
K. Chakrabarti ◽  
R. V. Kaczmarek ◽  
J. A. Thomas ◽  
M. Mahesh ◽  
R. C. Fleischman
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Phantom Image ◽  
Detector Noise

Average glandular dose and phantom image quality in mammography

2007 ◽  
Vol 580 (1) ◽  
pp. 574-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Oliveira ◽  
M.S. Nogueira ◽  
E. Guedes ◽  
M.C. Andrade ◽  
J.E. Peixoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Phantom Image ◽  
Average Glandular Dose

Efektifitas Penggunaan Sistem AEC (Smart mA) untuk Optimisasi Dosis dan Kualitas Citra pada Protokol CT Abdomen

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Habib Syeh Alzufri ◽  
◽  
Dede Nurmiati
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Power Spectrum ◽  
Good Condition ◽  
Noise Power ◽  
Noise Power Spectrum ◽  
Ct Number ◽  
Phantom Image ◽  
Water Phantom ◽  
Body Tissues ◽  
Power Spectrum Method

This study aims to analyze Automatic Exposure Control (AEC) with Smart mA software on water phantom image quality and CTDIvol dose. The researched image quality is CT Number and noise. In addition, the CT Number is evaluated for accuracy, uniformity, and noise using the Noise Power Spectrum method. The results of image measurements with and without Smart mA on CT Number accuracy are still in the Standard range of ± 4 CT, the uniformity value of CT Number and noise is also still within the Standard, namely ± 2 CT. The use of Smart mA increases the noise value by 14.29%. The noise value from the noise power spectrum analysis when using Smart mA is higher than without using Smart mA. Meanwhile, the CTDIvol radiation dose from using Smart mA decreases by 52.33%. Image quality using Smart mA has a CT Number value almost the same or uniform with the test object, namely water phantom, so that the use of Smart mA can characterize body tissues well, but the noise value generated is more significant than without using Smart mA. Although the noise value generated by Smart mA is more excellent, visually, the noise value does not disturb the radiologist too much in determining the diagnosis because the image quality is still in good condition so that it can give a dose according to the patient's body thickness according to the ALARA principle. Keywords: CT Number, CTDIvol, AEC, NPS.

Study of digital mammographic equipments by phantom image quality

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Mayo ◽  
F. Rodenas ◽  
G. Verdu ◽  
J.M. Campayo ◽  
J.I. Villaescusa
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Phantom Image

A quantitative method for visual phantom image quality evaluation

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dev P. Chakraborty ◽  
Xiong Liu ◽  
Michael O'Shea ◽  
Lawrence C. Toto
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Quantitative Method ◽  
Quality Evaluation ◽  
Phantom Image ◽  
Image Quality Evaluation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document