Correlation between human detection accuracy and observer model-based image quality metrics in computed tomography

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to compare computed tomography (CT) low-contrast detectability from human readers with observer model-based surrogates of image quality. A phantom with a range of low-contrast signals (five contrasts, three sizes) was imaged on a state-of-the-art CT scanner (Siemens’ force). Images were reconstructed using filtered back projection and advanced modeled iterative reconstruction and were assessed by 11 readers using a two alternative forced choice method. Concurrently, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), area-weighted CNR (CNRA), and observer model-based metrics were estimated, including nonprewhitening (NPW) matched filter, NPW with eye filter (NPWE), NPW with internal noise, NPW with an eye filter and internal noise (NPWEi), channelized Hotelling observer (CHO), and CHO with internal noise (CHOi). The correlation coefficients (Pearson and Spearman), linear discriminator error, E, and magnitude of confidence intervals, |CI95%|, were used to determine correlation, proper characterization of the reconstruction algorithms, and model precision, respectively. Pearson (Spearman) correlation was 0.36 (0.33), 0.83 (0.84), 0.84 (0.86), 0.86 (0.88), 0.86 (0.91), 0.88 (0.90), 0.85 (0.89), and 0.87 (0.84), E was 0.25, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, 0.25, 0.4, and 0.45, and |CI95%| was 2.84×10−3, 5.29×10−3, 4.91×10−3, 4.55×10−3, 2.16×10−3, 1.24×10−3, 4.58×10−2, and 7.95×10−2 for CNR, CNRA, NPW, NPWE, NPWi, NPWEi, CHO, and CHOi, respectively.

[1]  Shuai Leng,et al.  Correlation between model observer and human observer performance in CT imaging when lesion location is uncertain , 2012, Medical Imaging.

[2]  Katsuyuki Taguchi,et al.  Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. , 2012, Radiology.

[3]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  A methodology for image quality evaluation of advanced CT systems. , 2013, Medical physics.

[4]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. III. Calculation of figures of merit for model observers in statistically nonstationary backgrounds. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[5]  A. Burgess Visual perception studies and observer models in medical imaging. , 2011, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[6]  Yi Zhang,et al.  Correlation between human and model observer performance for discrimination task in CT , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Model observers for signal-known-statistically tasks (SKS) , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[8]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Evaluating iterative reconstruction performance in computed tomography. , 2014, Medical physics.

[9]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  CT image assessment by low contrast signal detectability evaluation with unknown signal location. , 2013, Medical physics.

[10]  Grace J Gang,et al.  Analysis of Fourier-domain task-based detectability index in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT in relation to human observer performance. , 2011, Medical physics.

[11]  Adam Wunderlich,et al.  Exact Confidence Intervals for Channelized Hotelling Observer Performance in Image Quality Studies , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  An Improved Index of Image Quality for Task-based Performance of CT Iterative Reconstruction across Three Commercial Implementations. , 2015, Radiology.

[13]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination. , 1981, Science.

[14]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of an Advanced Modeled Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm for Low-Contrast Detectability with a Third-Generation Dual-Source Multidetector CT Scanner: Potential for Radiation Dose Reduction in a Multireader Study. , 2015, Radiology.

[15]  Matt A. King,et al.  Channelized hotelling and human observer correlation for lesion detection in hepatic SPECT imaging. , 2000, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  The effect of nonlinear human visual system components on performance of a channelized Hotelling observer in structured backgrounds , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[17]  Michael A. King,et al.  LROC analysis of detector-response compensation in SPECT , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Estimation of human-observer templates in two-alternative forced-choice experiments , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[19]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Resolution and noise measurements of five CRT and LCD medical displays. , 2006, Medical physics.

[20]  Damien Racine,et al.  Anthropomorphic model observer performance in three-dimensional detection task for low-contrast computed tomography , 2016, Journal of medical imaging.

[21]  H.H. Barrett,et al.  Model observers for assessment of image quality , 1993, 2002 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[22]  David L. Wilson,et al.  Computational and human observer image quality evaluation of low dose, knowledge-based CT iterative reconstruction. , 2015, Medical physics.

[23]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. IV. Figures of merit for model performance in multiple-alternative forced-choice detection tasks with correlated responses. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[24]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. II. Effects of contrast gain control, background variations, and white noise. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[25]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Practical issues and methodology in assessment of image quality using model observers , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[26]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Assessment of volumetric noise and resolution performance for linear and nonlinear CT reconstruction methods. , 2014, Medical physics.

[27]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  Task-based measures of image quality and their relation to radiation dose and patient risk , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  Adam Wunderlich,et al.  Image covariance and lesion detectability in direct fan-beam x-ray computed tomography , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[29]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Modeling Visual Detection Tasks in Correlated Image Noise with Linear Model Observers , 2000 .

[30]  C E Metz,et al.  Digital image processing: effect on detectability of simulated low-contrast radiographic patterns. , 1984, Radiology.

[31]  Shuai Leng,et al.  Prediction of human observer performance in a 2-alternative forced choice low-contrast detection task using channelized Hotelling observer: impact of radiation dose and reconstruction algorithms. , 2013, Medical physics.

[32]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. I. Effect of number of possible spatial locations and signal contrast. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[33]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Quantum noise properties of CT images with anatomical textured backgrounds across reconstruction algorithms: FBP and SAFIRE. , 2014, Medical physics.

[34]  Mini Das,et al.  Visual-search observers for assessing tomographic x-ray image quality. , 2016, Medical physics.

[35]  Jay Bartroff,et al.  Automated computer evaluation and optimization of image compression of x-ray coronary angiograms for signal known exactly detection tasks. , 2003, Optics express.