Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35119116›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2022

Perceived contrast on displays with different luminance ranges.

Patrik Sund

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patrik SundDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden.
Sahlgrenska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMedical displays are fundamental in today's healthcare since they provide the link between digitally stored data and the human clinician, and it is thus important that the transfer of information is as effective and reliable as possible. Contrast perception in viewed images is complex due to the nature of the human visual system, and the luminance distribution in the viewed scene plays a major role. Standards and guidelines concerning medical displays are important as they set a baseline image quality. However, as the number of imaging applications as well as display technology has evolved rapidly during the past decades, there may be possible uses not foreseen in the current guidelines. Bright screens may perform as good in bright rooms as less bright displays do in dark rooms, but current guidelines are likely to favor dark rooms due to historical reasons. The purpose of this study was to determine the limits of contrast perception in three very different lighting conditions and relate the outcome to guideline recommendations.

methodsThree different display luminance settings were studied, 1-250, 6-500, and 12-750 cd/m

resultsThe contrast thresholds for the low-frequency patterns were close to 0.5 JNDs and there were no systematic differences between the three luminance conditions at any of the pixel values. The high-frequency patterns required almost 10 times higher contrast where the highest contrast threshold (worst visibility) was obtained for the luminance setting 1-250 cd/m

conclusionsThe differences between the three luminance conditions were mostly minor, which indicate that display settings with low luminance ratios and high minimum luminance levels can be used without compromising displayed image contrast. The number of JNDs enclosed by the luminance range of a display is a reliable metric for global perceived contrast. Luminance ratios are limited regarding the ability to detect low contrast objects when there are large differences in luminance, although they can still be used within a relatively small range of luminance levels. Low luminance levels may cause a loss of visibility, especially for fine details, and should be avoided.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingHumansimage qualitymedical displayvisual perception

Identifiers

PMID35119116
PMCPMC9305559
OpenAlexW4210722595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.