Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 May;13(2 Suppl 1):155-61.
doi: 10.1007/BF03167650.

Active matrix liquid crystal displays for clinical imaging: comparison with cathode ray tube displays

W Pavlicek  1 , J M Owen, M B Peter
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Active matrix liquid crystal displays for clinical imaging: comparison with cathode ray tube displays

W Pavlicek et al. J Digit Imaging. 2000 May.

Abstract

Fifteen large-area, flat-panel displays used for clinical image review were evaluated for image quality and compared with 30 comparably sized cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors. Measurements were of image display patterns by Video Electronic Standards Association (VESA) and a commercial product. Field measurements were made of: maximum and minimum luminance, ambient lighting, characteristic curve (gamma), point shape and size, high-contrast resolution, uniformity, and distortion. Assessments were made of pixel defects, latent image patterns, ghosting artifacts, and viewing angle luminance. Also, a questionnaire was generated for users of the flat-panel and CRT units. Seventeen respondents indicated no preference for either flat panel or CRT. Results show these flat panels to have higher luminance (mean, 177.7 cd/m2); larger number of just noticeable differences (JNDs; n = 555), higher gamma, comparable uniformity, and warm-up time. CRTs had less angle viewing dependence and far fewer artifacts (ghosting and latent images). Our questionnaire showed active matrix liquid crystal displays (AMLCD) to be fully acceptable for clinical image viewing. Furthermore, the statistical results show that further testing for new AMLCDs of this type is unwarranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Erickson B, Ryan W, Gehring D, et al. Image display for clinicians on medical record workstations. J Digit Imaging. 1997;10(suppl):38–40. doi: 10.1007/BF03168653. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pavlicek W, Zavalkovskiy B, Eversman W, et al. Performance and function of a multiple star topology image management system at Mayo Clinic Scottsdale. J Digit Imaging. 1999;12(suppl):168–174. doi: 10.1007/BF03168791. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eversman WG, Pavlicek W, Zavalkovskiy B, et al. Performance and function of a desktop viewer at Mayo Clinic Scottsdale. J Digit Imaging. 2000;13(suppl 1):147–152. doi: 10.1007/BF03167648. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mattern C, Erickson B, King B, et al. Impact of electronic imaging on clinician behavior in the urgent care setting. J Digit Imaging. 1999;12(suppl):148–151. doi: 10.1007/BF03168785. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. MultiSync LCD 2010 Users Manual. Itasca, IL, NEC Technologies, 1999

Publication types