Cargando…

Comparative observer effects in 2D and 3D localization tasks

Purpose: Three-dimensional “volumetric” imaging methods are now a common component of medical imaging across many imaging modalities. Relatively little is known about how human observers localize targets masked by noise and clutter as they scroll through a 3D image and how it compares to a similar t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abbey, Craig K., Lago, Miguel A., Eckstein, Miguel P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7970410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33758765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.8.4.041206
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: Three-dimensional “volumetric” imaging methods are now a common component of medical imaging across many imaging modalities. Relatively little is known about how human observers localize targets masked by noise and clutter as they scroll through a 3D image and how it compares to a similar task confined to a single 2D slice. Approach: Gaussian random textures were used to represent noisy volumetric medical images. Subjects were able to freely inspect the images, including scrolling through 3D images as part of their search process. A total of eight experimental conditions were evaluated (2D versus 3D images, large versus small targets, power-law versus white noise). We analyze performance in these experiments using task efficiency and the classification image technique. Results: In 3D tasks, median response times were roughly nine times longer than 2D, with larger relative differences for incorrect trials. The efficiency data show a dissociation in which subjects perform with higher statistical efficiency in 2D tasks for large targets and higher efficiency in 3D tasks with small targets. The classification images suggest that a critical mechanism behind this dissociation is an inability to integrate across multiple slices to form a 3D localization response. The central slices of 3D classification images are remarkably similar to the corresponding 2D classification images. Conclusions: 2D and 3D tasks show similar weighting patterns between 2D images and the central slice of 3D images. There is relatively little weighting across slices in the 3D tasks, leading to lower task efficiency with respect to the ideal observer.