↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Report of AAPM Task Group 162: Software for planar image quality metrology

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Report of AAPM Task Group 162: Software for planar image quality metrology
Published in
Medical Physics, January 2018
DOI 10.1002/mp.12718
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ehsan Samei, Lynda C. Ikejimba, Brian P. Harrawood, John Rong, Ian A. Cunningham, Michael J. Flynn

Abstract

The AAPM Task Group 162 aimed to provide a standardized approach for the assessment of image quality in planar imaging systems. This report offers a description of the approach as well as the details of the resultant software bundle to measure detective quantum efficiency (DQE) as well as its basis components and derivatives. The methodology and the associated software include the characterization of the noise power spectrum (NPS) from planar images acquired under specific acquisition conditions, modulation transfer function (MTF) using an edge test object, the DQE, and effective DQE (eDQE). First, a methodological framework is provided to highlight the theoretical basis of the work. Then, a step-by-step guide is included to assist in proper execution of each component of the code. Lastly, an evaluation of the method is included to validate its accuracy against model-based and experimental data. The code was built using a Macintosh OSX operating system. The software package contains all the source codes to permit an experienced user to build the suite on a Linux or other *nix type system. The package further includes manuals and sample images and scripts to demonstrate use of the software for new users. The results of the code are in close alignment with theoretical expectations and published results of experimental data. The methodology and the software package offered in AAPM TG162 can be used as baseline for characterization of inherent image quality attributes of planar imaging systems. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Other 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 13 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 19 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 23%
Engineering 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 18 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,708,472
of 24,669,628 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#4,478
of 7,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,357
of 452,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#28
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,669,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,897 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.