TY - GEN
T1 - Potential workflow advantages with single 8MP versus dual 5MP displays
AU - Krupinski, Elizabeth A
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 SPIE.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - This study compared an 8MP vs dual-5MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display, 15 with eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8MP taking less time (62.04 sec vs 68.99). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8MP (134.47 vs 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with single (6.83 vs 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs 8.39). Overall the single 8MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers' ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.
AB - This study compared an 8MP vs dual-5MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display, 15 with eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8MP taking less time (62.04 sec vs 68.99). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8MP (134.47 vs 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with single (6.83 vs 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs 8.39). Overall the single 8MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers' ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.
KW - Bezel
KW - Diagnostic accuracy
KW - Dual display
KW - Single display
KW - Visual search
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84976312772&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84976312772&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1117/12.2207542
DO - 10.1117/12.2207542
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84976312772
T3 - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
BT - Medical Imaging 2016
A2 - Abbey, Craig K.
A2 - Kupinski, Matthew A.
PB - SPIE
T2 - Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment
Y2 - 2 March 2016 through 3 March 2016
ER -