Paper
23 February 2010 The varying effects of ambient lighting on low contrast detection tasks
Mark F. McEntee, Barbara Martin
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to determine if there is a significant difference between the detection of low-contrast objects on 1MP review monitor and 3MP primary monitor. METHOD: The monitors compared were a 1MP NEC Multisync 1980SXi and a 3MP Barco Coronis MFGD 3420. The low-contrast detectability of these monitors was compared at a high ambient light setting (73 lx) equivalent to that of a ward or intensive care unit in the clinical setting and a low setting (20 lx) which reflected that used in reporting rooms in standard practice. The comparison was made using a CDRAD test tool and visualisation of nasogastric tubes and a central line. RESULTS: Image quality results for both the psychophysical and diagnostic performance test were substantially higher for the 3MP monitor than those obtained for the 1MP. Significant differences p≤0.000 existed between the IQF results for the 2 monitors. Image quality results were higher at the lower ambient light setting for both monitors. CONCLUSION: Contrast visualisation is significantly improved through the use of primary monitors. Review monitors are adequate for the visualisation of lines an NG tubes in low and high light settings.
© (2010) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Mark F. McEntee and Barbara Martin "The varying effects of ambient lighting on low contrast detection tasks", Proc. SPIE 7627, Medical Imaging 2010: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 76270N (23 February 2010); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.843786
Advertisement
Advertisement
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission  Get copyright permission on Copyright Marketplace
KEYWORDS
Image quality

LCDs

Light sources and illumination

Visualization

Diagnostics

Chest imaging

Image quality standards

Back to Top