Diagnostic Accuracy and Visual Search Efficiency: Single 8 MP vs. Dual 5 MP Displays

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study compared a single 8 MP vs. dual 5 MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times the readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display. A sub-set of 15 cases was viewed in a secondary study using eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8 MP taking less time (62.04 vs. 68.99 s). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs. 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8 MP (134.47 vs. 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with 8 MP (6.83 vs. 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs. 8.39). Overall, the single 8 MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5 MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers’ ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)144-147
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Digital Imaging
Volume30
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Display devices
Reading

Keywords

  • Digital display
  • Image perception
  • Observer performance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Computer Science Applications

Cite this

Diagnostic Accuracy and Visual Search Efficiency : Single 8 MP vs. Dual 5 MP Displays. / Krupinski, Elizabeth A.

In: Journal of Digital Imaging, Vol. 30, No. 2, 01.04.2017, p. 144-147.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5688b3563f754f7ba67912bf57c6f4fb,
title = "Diagnostic Accuracy and Visual Search Efficiency: Single 8 MP vs. Dual 5 MP Displays",
abstract = "This study compared a single 8 MP vs. dual 5 MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times the readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display. A sub-set of 15 cases was viewed in a secondary study using eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8 MP taking less time (62.04 vs. 68.99 s). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs. 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8 MP (134.47 vs. 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with 8 MP (6.83 vs. 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs. 8.39). Overall, the single 8 MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5 MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers’ ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.",
keywords = "Digital display, Image perception, Observer performance",
author = "Krupinski, {Elizabeth A}",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10278-016-9917-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "144--147",
journal = "Journal of Digital Imaging",
issn = "0897-1889",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnostic Accuracy and Visual Search Efficiency

T2 - Single 8 MP vs. Dual 5 MP Displays

AU - Krupinski, Elizabeth A

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - This study compared a single 8 MP vs. dual 5 MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times the readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display. A sub-set of 15 cases was viewed in a secondary study using eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8 MP taking less time (62.04 vs. 68.99 s). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs. 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8 MP (134.47 vs. 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with 8 MP (6.83 vs. 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs. 8.39). Overall, the single 8 MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5 MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers’ ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.

AB - This study compared a single 8 MP vs. dual 5 MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times the readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display. A sub-set of 15 cases was viewed in a secondary study using eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8 MP taking less time (62.04 vs. 68.99 s). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs. 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8 MP (134.47 vs. 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with 8 MP (6.83 vs. 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs. 8.39). Overall, the single 8 MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5 MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers’ ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.

KW - Digital display

KW - Image perception

KW - Observer performance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992754249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992754249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10278-016-9917-6

DO - 10.1007/s10278-016-9917-6

M3 - Article

C2 - 27798745

AN - SCOPUS:84992754249

VL - 30

SP - 144

EP - 147

JO - Journal of Digital Imaging

JF - Journal of Digital Imaging

SN - 0897-1889

IS - 2

ER -