ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Web-Based DICOM Viewers: A Survey and a Performance Classification.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use, Utility, and User Experience of Cloud-Based Medical Imaging in Pulmonary Nodule Care in China: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and Evaluation of A PC-Compatible E-Learning System for Mammography and Breast Ultrasound.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Article
- Imaging Findings of Clinical Significance in Endodontics During Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanning of the Upper Airway-The Anterior, Bilateral, C-Shaped, Dual of Mandibular Root Canals: A Brief Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of supracondylar dome osteotomy in reducing lateral condylar prominence and enhancing functional outcomes in pediatric cubitus varus: a retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The standard for managing image data in healthcare is the DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) protocol. DICOM web-viewers provide flexible and accessible platforms for their users to view and analyze DICOM images remotely. This article presents a comprehensive evaluation of various web-based DICOM viewers, emphasizing their performance in different rendering scenarios, browsers, and operating systems. The study includes a total of 16 web-based viewers, of which 12 were surveyed, and 7 were compared performance-wise based on the availability of an online demo. The criteria for examination include accessibility features, such as available information or requirements for usage, interface features, such as loading capabilities or cloud storage, two-dimensional (2D) viewing features, such as the ability to perform measurements or alter the viewing window, and three-dimensional (3D) viewing features, such as volume rendering or secondary reconstruction. Only 4 of the viewers allow for the viewing of local DICOM files in 3D (other than MPR(Multiplanar reconstruction)). Premium software offers a large amount of features with overall good performance. One of the free alternatives demonstrated the best efficiency in both 2D and 3D rendering but faces challenges with missing 3D rendering features in its interface, which is still in development. Other free options exhibited slower performance, especially in 2D rendering but have more ready-to-use features on their web app. The evaluation also underscores the importance of browser choice, with some browsers performing much better than the competition, and highlights the significance of hardware when dealing with rendering tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.