You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither SPIE nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the SPIE website.
17 March 2015What observer models best reflect low-contrast detectability in CT?
The purpose of this work was to compare CT low-contrast detectability as measured via human perception experiments with observer model surrogates of image quality measured directly from the images. A phantom was designed with a range of low-contrast circular inserts representing 5 contrast levels and 3 sizes. The phantom was imaged repeatedly (20 times) on a third-generation dual-source CT scanner (SOMATOM Definition Force, Siemens Healthcare). Images were reconstructed at 0.6 mm slice thickness using filtered back projection (FBP) and advanced modeled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE) and were assessed by eleven blinded and independent readers using a two alternative forced choice (2AFC) detection experiment. The human scores were taken as the accuracy, averaged across observers. The predicted performance was computed directly from the images for several traditional image quality metrics and model observers including contrast to noise ratio (CNR), area weighted CNR (CNRa), non-prewhitening matched filter (NPW), non-prewhitening matched filter with an eye filter (NPWE), channelized Hotelling observer (CHO), and channelized Hotelling observer with internal noise (CHOi). The correlation between model observer predictions and human performance was assessed using linear regression analysis. The coefficient of determination (R2) was used as goodness-of-fit metric to determine how well each model observer predicts human performance. R2 was 0.11, 0.71, 0.73, 0.77, 0.60, and 0.72 for CNR, CNRa, NPW, NPWE, CHO, and CHOi, respectively. The findings demonstrate NPW, NPWE, and CHOi all to have strong correlation with human performance and could be used to optimize scan and reconstruction settings.