BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (2003) 76, 464-472
© 2003 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/82965103
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gallacher, D J
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, J E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gallacher, D J
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, J E

Use of a quality index in threshold contrast detail detection measurements in television fluoroscopy

D J Gallacher, MPhil 1 A Mackenzie, MSc 2 S Batchelor, MSc 1 J Lynch, MSc 3 and J E Saunders, BSc 4

1 Medical Physics Department, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, 2 King's Centre for Assessment of Radiological Equipment (KCARE), King's Hospital, London, 3 Medical Physics Department, Princess Margaret Hospital, Swindon and 4 Formerly Medical Physics Department, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK



View larger version (6K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Comparison of the standard threshold detection index plots relating to 25 cm field of view versus detail diameter. {triangleup}=F25, FAXIL Data (F25, 1992); x =STB1, STB/7/82 New Systems Data (DOH, 1982); +=STB2, STB/7/82 Systems of age 5 years (DOH, 1982).

 


View larger version (6K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Three 25 cm field of view curves best fit normalized to the FAXIL F25 (upper curve) versus detail diameter. {triangleup}=F25, FAXIL Data (F25, 1992); x =STB1, STB/7/82 New Systems Data (DOH, 1982); +=STB2, STB/7/82 Systems of age 5 years (DOH, 1982).

 


View larger version (10K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. FAXIL data curves for 30/36 cm, 25 cm, 15/17 cm field of view versus apparent detail size. {square}=F33, FAXIL Data (F33, 1992); {triangleup}=F25, FAXIL Data (F25, 1992); {circ}=F16, FAXIL Data (F16, 1992).

 


View larger version (8K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. Best root mean square difference fit normalized curves for 30/36 cm, 25 cm and 15/17 cm versus apparent detail size. {square}=Normalized F33 to F25; {triangleup}=F25, FAXIL Data (F25, 1992); {circ}=Normalized F16 to F25.

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2003 by the British Institute of Radiology.