Unified SNR analysis of medical imaging systems

The ideal observer signal to noise ratio (snr) has been derived from statistical decision theory for all of the major medical imaging modalities. This snr provides an absolute scale for image system performance assessment and leads to instrumentation design goals and constraints for imaging system optimisation since no observer can surpass the performance of the ideal observer. The dependence of detectable detail size on exposure or imaging time follows immediately from the analysis. A framework emerges for comparing data acquisition techniques, e.g. reconstruction from projections versus Fourier methods in nmr imaging, and time of flight positron emission tomography (tofpet) versus conventional pet. The approach of studying the ideal observer is motivated by measurements on human observers which show that they can come close to the performance of the idea) observer, except when the image noise has negative correlations-as in images reconstructed from projections-where they suffer a small but significant penalty.

[1]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Low Contrast Detectability and Contrast/Detail Analysis in Medical Ultrasound , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[2]  A. Rose The sensitivity performance of the human eye on an absolute scale. , 1948, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[3]  John A. Swets,et al.  Evaluation of diagnostic systems : methods from signal detection theory , 1982 .

[4]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Application of information theory to the assessment of computed tomography. , 1979, Medical physics.

[5]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Toward a unified view of radiological imaging systems. Part II: Noisy images , 1974 .

[6]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Radiographic screen-film noise power spectrum: calibration and intercomparison. , 1982, Applied optics.

[7]  A E Burgess,et al.  The observer SNR penalty for reconstructions from projections , 1984, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  Oosterkamp Iw Monochromatic x-rays for medical fluoroscopy and radiography? , 1961 .

[9]  F A DiBianca,et al.  The Use of Contrast‐Detail‐Dose Evaluation of Image Quality in a Computed Tomographic Scanner , 1979, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[10]  Harrison H. Barrett,et al.  Three-dimensional reconstruction from planar projections , 1980 .

[11]  M. Ter-pogossian,et al.  Experimental Assessment of the Gain Achieved by the Utilization of Time-of-Flight Information in a Positron Emission Tomograph (Super PETT I) , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  S. Riederer,et al.  Selective iodine imaging using K-edge energies in computerized x-ray tomography. , 1977, Medical physics.

[13]  M Danos,et al.  Image information content and patient exposure. , 1978, Medical physics.

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

[15]  Robert A. Kruger,et al.  Digital Angiography Using a Matched Filter , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  P A Bottomley,et al.  Signal, Noise, and Contrast in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Imaging , 1983, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[17]  R. Shaw,et al.  The Equivalent Quantum Efficiency of the Photographic Process , 1963 .

[18]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Low Contrast Sensitivity of Radiologic, CT, Nuclear Medicine, and Ultrasound Medical Imaging Systems , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[19]  Philip F. Judy,et al.  Lesion detection and signal–to–noise ratio in CT images , 1981 .

[20]  S K Hilal,et al.  Clinical and experimental investigation of a smoothed CT reconstruction algorithm. , 1980, Radiology.

[21]  P. Lauterbur,et al.  The sensitivity of the zeugmatographic experiment involving human samples , 1979 .

[22]  W. Edelstein,et al.  Spin warp NMR imaging and applications to human whole-body imaging. , 1980, Physics in medicine and biology.

[23]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Overview of a Unified SNR Analysis of Medical Imaging Systems , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[24]  R. Shaw,et al.  Evaluating the efficient of imaging processes , 1978 .

[25]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Statistics of Speckle in Ultrasound B-Scans , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[26]  Paul G. Roetling,et al.  Theoretical Prediction of Image Quality , 1968 .

[27]  K. Hanson,et al.  Detectability in computed tomographic images. , 1979, Medical physics.

[28]  C E Dick,et al.  Image information transfer properties of x-ray fluorescent screens. , 1981, Medical physics.

[29]  K M Hanson,et al.  On the Optimality of the Filtered Backprojection Algorithm , 1980, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[30]  R. K. Swank Absorption and noise in x‐ray phosphors , 1973 .

[31]  K Doi,et al.  A comparison of physical image quality indices and observer performance in the radiographic detection of nylon beads. , 1984, Physics in medicine and biology.

[32]  D. O. North,et al.  An Analysis of the factors which determine signal/noise discrimination in pulsed-carrier systems , 1963 .

[33]  N M Hylton,et al.  Signal to Noise in Derived NMR Images , 1984, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[34]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Effect of reduced scatter on radiographic information content and patient exposure: a quantitative demonstration. , 1980, Medical physics.

[35]  J. L. Harris Resolving Power and Decision Theory , 1964 .

[36]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. II. Signal-location identification. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[37]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Absolute measures of physical image quality: measurement and application to radiographic magnification. , 1982, Medical physics.

[38]  Michel M. Ter-Pogossian,et al.  Super PETT I: A Positron Emission Tomograph Utilizing Photon Time-of-Flight Information , 1982 .

[39]  C E Metz,et al.  Wiener spectral effects of spatial correlation between the sites of characteristic x-ray emission and reabsorption in radiographic screen-film systems. , 1983, Physics in medicine and biology.

[40]  O. Tretiak Noise limitations in X-ray computed tomography. , 1978, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[41]  Otto H. Schade An Evaluation of Photographic Image Quality and Resolving Power , 1964 .

[42]  Albert Macovski,et al.  Medical imaging systems , 1983 .

[43]  K Doi,et al.  Studies of x-ray energy absorption and quantum noise properties of x-ray screens by use of Monte Carlo simulation. , 1984, Medical physics.

[44]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Rician statistics and signal detectability in ultrasonic B-scans , 1983 .

[45]  John Bowman Thomas,et al.  An introduction to statistical communication theory , 1969 .