1. Seshadri SB, Arenson RL, DeSimone D, Hiss S: Cost-savings associated with a digital radiology department: a preliminary study. Presented at the Ninth Conference on Computer Applications in Radiology, Hilton Head, SC, June 1988.
2. Gee JC, DeSoto LA, Kim Y, Haynor DR, Loop JW. User interface design for a radiological imaging workstation. SPIE Med Imaging III. 1989;1093:122–132.
3. Braudes SE, Mun SK, Sibert J, Schnizlein J, Horii S. Workstation modelling and development: clinical definition of a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) user interface. SPIE Med Imaging III. 1989;1093:376–386.
4. Cox GG, McMillan JH, Wetzel LH, Siegel EL, Templeton AW, Dwyer III SJ. Direct diagnosis from a 2,000 × 2,000 × 12-bit displays: comparison with hard copy (abstr). Radiology. 1989;173(P):471.
5. MacMahon H, Metz C, Doi K, Kim T, Giger ML, Chan H. Digital chest radiography: effect on diagnostic accuracy of hard copy. Radiology. 1988;168:669–673. [PubMed]
6. Yamasaki K, Sato K, Kusumoto M, Adachi S, Kuno M. Comparative studies of physical characteristics and clinical efficacy of digitized chest image (abstr). Radiology. 1989;173(P):226.
7. Oestmann JW, Greene R, Rubens JR, et al. High-frequency edge enhancement in the detection of fine pulmonary lines. Invest Radiol. 1989;24:643–646. [PubMed]
8. Ishida M, Frank PH, Doi K, Lehr JL. High quality digital radiographic images: improved detection of low-contrast objects and preliminary clinical studies. RadioGraphics. 1983;3:325–338.
9. Sheline ME, Brikman I, Epstein D, Mezrich J, Kundel HL, Arenson RL. The diagnosis of pulmonary nodules; comparison between standard and inverse digitized images and conventional chest radiographs. AJR. 1989;152:261–263. [PubMed] 10. Cornsweet TH, Pensker HM. Luminance discrimination of brief flashes under various conditions of adaption. J Physiol (Lond) 1965;176:294–310. [PubMed]
11. Hendee WR. The physical principles of computed tomography. Boston: Little Brown; 1983.
12. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Thickman D, Carmody D, Toto L. Nodule detection with and without a chest image. Invest Radiol. 1985;20:94–99. [PubMed] 13. Metz CE. ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Invest Radiol. 1986;21:720–733. [PubMed] 14. Foley WD, Wilson CR, Keyes GS, et al. The effect of varying spatial resolution on the detectability of diffuse pulmonary nodules. Radiology. 1981;141:25–31. [PubMed] 15. Huebener K-H. Scanned projection radiography of the chest versus standard film radiography: a comparison of 250 cases. Radiology. 1983;148:363–368. [PubMed] 16. Seeley GW, Newell JD. The use of psychophysical principles in the design of a total digital radiology department. Radiol Clin North Am. 1985;23:341–348. [PubMed] 17. MacMahon H, Vyborny CJ, Metz CE, Doi K, Sabeti V, Solomon S. Digital radiography of subtle pulmonary abnormalities: an ROC study of the effect of pixel size on observer performance. Radiology. 1986;158:21–26. [PubMed] 18. Lams PM, Cocklin ML. Spatial resolution requirements for digital chest radiographs: an ROC study of observer performance in selected cases. Radiology. 1986;158:11–19. [PubMed] 19. Goodman LR, Foley WD, Wilson DR, Rimm AA, Lawson TL. Digital and conventional chest images: observer performance with film digital radiography system. Radiology. 1986;158:27–33. [PubMed] 20. Chakraborty DP, Breatnach ES, Yester MV, Soto B, Barnes GT, Fraser R. Digital and conventional chest imaging: a modified ROC study of observer performance using simulated nodules. Radiology. 1986;158:35–39. [PubMed] 21. Niklason LT, Hickey NM, Chakraborty DP, et al. Simulated pulmonary nodules: detection with dual energy digital versus conventional radiography. Radiology. 1986;160:589–593. [PubMed] 22. Kushner DC, Cleveland RH, Herman TE, et al. Low-dose flying spot digital radiography of the chest: sensitivity studies. Radiology. 1987;163:685–688. [PubMed] 23. Barnes GT, Sabbagh EA, Chakraborty DP, et al. A comparison of dual-energy digital radiography and screen-film imaging in the detection of subtle interstitial pulmonary disease. Invest Radiol. 1989;24:585–591. [PubMed] 24. Chan H, Vyborny CJ, MacMahon H, Metz CE, Doi K, Sickles EA. Digital mammography ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Invest Radiol. 1987;22:581–589. [PubMed] 25. Oestmann JW, Kopans D, Hall DA, McCarthy KA, Rubens JR, Greene R. A comparison of digitized storage phosphors and conventional mammography in the detection of malignant microcalcifications. Invest Radiol. 1988;23:726–723. [PubMed]
26. Seeley GW, Stempski M, Roehrig H, Nudelman S, Capp MP. Psychophysical comparison of a video display system to film by using bone fracture images. Presented at the First International Symposium on Medical Imaging and Image Interpretation. Berlin: Federal Republic of Germany; October 1982.
27. Murphey MD. Digital skeletal radiography: spatial resolution requirements for detection of subperiosteal resorption. AJR. 1989;152:541–546. [PubMed] 28. Kastan DJ, Ackerman LV, Feczko PJ. Digital gastrointestinal imaging: the effect of pixel size on detection of subtle mucosal abnormalities. Radiology. 1987;167:853–856. [PubMed] 29. Fajardo LL, Hillman BJ, Hunter TB, Claypool HR, Westerman BR, Mockbee B. Excretory urography using computed radiography. Radiology. 1987;162:345–351. [PubMed]
30. Rose A. Vision, human and electronic. New York: Plenum; 1973.
31. Kruger RA, Mistretta CA, Riederer SJ. Physical and technical considerations of computerized fluoroscopy difference imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1981;NS28:205–212.
32. Rimkus D, Baily NA. Patient exposure requirements for high contrast resolution in digital radiographic systems. AJR. 1984;142:603–608. [PubMed]
33. Tannas LE. Flat-panel displays and CRTs. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1985.
34. Suddarth SA, Johnson GA, Sherrier RH, Ravin CE. Performance of high-resolution monitors for digital chest imaging. Med Phys. 1987;14:253–257. doi: 10.1118/1.596079. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
35. Johnston RE: Display monitors. Presented at the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Summer School in Image Communication and Image Analysis, Ann Arbor, Mien, July 12-17, 1987.
36. O’Malley KG, Giunta JA. The alternator: determination of its fundamental features, as a basis for design of a PACS. SPIE Med Imaging II. 1988;914:988–994.
37. Kasaday LR. Human factor considerations in PACS design. SPIE Med XIV PACS IV. 1986;626:581–592.
38. Rogers DC, Johnston RE, Brenton B, Staab EV, Thomson B, Perry JR. Predicting PACS console requirements from radiologists’ reading habits. SPIE PACS III. 1985;536:88–96.
39. Beard D, Pizer S, Rogers D, Cromartie R. A prototype single-screen PACS console development using human computer interaction techniques. SPIE Med Imaging. 1987;767:646–653.
40. Johnston RE, Beard DV, Creasy JL, Perry JR: UNC PACS II: consoles. Presented at the Ninth Conference on Computer Applications in Radiology, Hilton Head, SC, June 1-4, 1988.
41. Lo SB, Mun SK, Braudes RE, Levine BA. A workstation for rapid image presentation. SPIE Med Imaging. 1989;III:1093–1098.
42. American national standards for human factors engineering of visual display terminal workstations. Santa Monica, Calif: Human Factors Society; 1988.
43. van der Voorde F, Arenson RL, Kundel HL, et al. Development of a physician friendly digital image display console. PACS IV. 1986;626:541–548.
44. Alter AJ, Kargas GA, Kargas SA, et al. The influence of ambient and viewbox light upon visual detection of low-contrast targets in a radiograph. Invest Radiol. 1982;17:402–406. [PubMed] 45. Rogers DC, Johnston RE. Effect of ambient light on electronically displayed medical images as measured by luminance-discrimination thresholds. J Opt Soc Am [A] 1987;4:976–983. [PubMed]
46. Seshadri SB, Arenson RL, Khalsa SS, Brikman IS, van der Voorde F. Prototype image management system (MIMS) at the University of Pennsylvania: software design considerations. SPIE Med Imaging. 1987;767:793–800.
47. Haynor DR, Saarinen AO. “Old study” and the correlative study: implications for PACS. SPIE Med Imaging III. 1989;1093:10–12.
48. Cox GG, Templeton AW, Anderson WH, Cook LT, Hensley KS, Dwyer SJ. Estimating digital information throughput rates for radiology networks. Invest Radiol. 1986;21:162–169. [PubMed]
49. Arenson RL, Seshadri SB, Stevens F, van der Voorde F. Proceedings of computer assisted radiology. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1987. The overlapping domains and interface between radiology information management systems and medical image management systems (PACS). pp. 855–865.
50. Arenson RL, Seshadri SB, Kundel HL, et al. Clinical evaluation of a medical image management system for chest images. AJR. 1988;150:55–59. [PubMed] 51. Gershon-Cohen J, Fisher JF. Television contrast expansion of single roentgenograms. AJR. 1959;81:325–327. [PubMed] 52. Meyers PH, Becker HC, Sweeney JW, Nice C, Nettleton WJ. Evaluation of a computer retrieved radiographic image. Radiology. 1963;201:83–85. [PubMed]
53. Nathan R. Picture enhancement for the moon, Mars, and man. In: Cheng GC, Ledley RS, Pollock DK, Rosenfeld A, editors. Pictorial pattern recognition. Washington, DC: Thomson; 1968. pp. 239–266.
54. Kundel HL, Revesz G, Stauffer HM. The electro-optical processing of radiographic images. Radiol Clin North Am. 1969;8:447–460. [PubMed] 55. Mistretta CA, Crummy AB. Diagnosis of cardiovascular disease by digital subtraction angiography. Science. 1981;214:761–765. [PubMed]
56. Ishida M, Frank PH, Doi K, Lehr JL. High quality digital radiographic images: improved detection of low-contrast objects and preliminary clinical studies. RadioGraphics. 1982;3:325–338.
57. Kundel HL. Visual perception and image display terminals. Radiol Clin North Am. 1986;24:69–78. [PubMed]
58. Schreiber WF. Fundamentals of electronic imaging systems. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1986.
59. Pizer SM, Chan FH. Evaluation of the number of discernible levels produced by a display. In: Dipaola R, Kahn E, editors. Information processing in medical imaging. Proceedings of the VIth International Conference on Information Processing in Medical Imaging. Vol 88. Paris: INSERM; 1980.
60. Cromartie RC, Johnston RE, Pizer SM, Rogers D. Standardization of electronic display devices based on human perception. University of North Carolina Department of Computer Science technical report 88-002. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina; 1987.
61. Pizer SM, Zimmerman JB, Staab EV. Adaptive grey level assignment in CT scan display. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1984;8:300–305. [PubMed]
62. McShan DL, Glickman AS. Color displays for medical imaging in color and the computer. In: Durrett HJ, editor. Color and the computer. San Diego: Academic Press; 1987. pp. 189–204.
63. Chan FH, Pizer SM. An ultrasonogram display system using natural color. JCU. 1976;4:335–338. [PubMed] 64. Vannier MW, Rickman D. Multispectral and color-aided displays. Invest Radiol. 1989;24:88–91. [PubMed] 65. DeSimone DN, Kundel HL, Arenson RL, et al. Effect of a digital imaging network on physician behavior in an intensive care unit. Radiology. 1988;169:41–44. [PubMed] 66. Swett HA, Miller PL. ICON: computer-based approach to differential diagnosis in radiology. Radiology. 1987;163:555–558. [PubMed] 67. Fischer HW. Danger ahead (editorial). Radiology. 1988;169:267. [PubMed] 68. Arenson RL. Opportunity ahead (editorial response). Radiology. 1988;169:267–268. [PubMed]