<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">39750411X</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180308164540.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">161202e19950101xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082495</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">0144-8420</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">pii</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)oxford-10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082495</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Bergmann (INVITED)</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">H.</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">INVITED</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Inter-Laboratory Comparison of Imaging Devices in Nuclear Medicine</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[H. Bergmann (INVITED)]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Inter-laboratory comparison studies (proficiency testing) are primarily used to review internal quality control programmes. A useful side effect is to stimulate the inter-convertibility of data from different laboratories. Imaging devices are compared either by evaluating physical performance parameters characterising imaging quality or by comparing test images made of suitable test objects (phantoms). The first approach is used when comparing imaging devices with closely matching performance, a situation usually found only when selecting equipment. The latter method is used when comparing imaging devices with considerably varying performance, which is the situation encountered in proficiency testing. A major difficulty is the need to compare and rank objectively the quality of the test images produced. An accepted method is based on ROC methodology and has been employed successfully in the field of nuclear medicine for inter-laboratory comparison studies of the performance of gamma cameras. More recently analysis software used for digital image processing in medicine has been identified as an area where inter-laboratory comparison studies are needed. Here the most promising approach is to analyse representative patient studies (software phantoms) by the software to be tested and to compare the results obtained with either true values, if known, or by statistical methods. Difficulties that still need to be resolved are the transfer of patient studies between dissimilar computer systems or to define methods for identifying studies that are representative for a given type of procedure and disease. The latter problem is closely related to standardisation. A European scientific project named COST B2 was created exclusively for producing such software phantoms and other tools to enable proficiency testing of software used to analyse medical images.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Radiation Protection Dosimetry</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Radiation Protection Dosimetry</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Oxford University Press</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">57/1-4(1995-01-01), 21-26</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0144-8420</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">57:1-4&lt;21</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1995</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">57</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">rpd</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082495</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082495</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Bergmann (INVITED)</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">H.</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">INVITED</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Radiation Protection Dosimetry</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Oxford University Press</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">57/1-4(1995-01-01), 21-26</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0144-8420</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">57:1-4&lt;21</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1995</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">57</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">rpd</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">CC BY-NC-4.0</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-oxford</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
