Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 10209723

Glaucoma imaging: technology in progress.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R P Mills. 1999. Glaucoma imaging: technology in progress.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10209723/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Hypothesis testing III: counts and medians.

Radiology research involves comparisons that deal with the presence or absence of various imaging signs and the accuracy of a diagnosis. In this article, the authors describe the statistical tests that should be used when the data are not distributed normally or when they are categorical variables. These nonparametric tests are used to analyze a 2 x 2 contingency table of categorical data. The tests include the chi2 test, Fisher exact test, and McNemar test. When the data are continuous, different nonparametric tests are used to compare paired samples, such as the Mann-Whitney U test (equivalent to the Wilcoxon rank sum test), the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and the sign test. These nonparametric tests are considered alternatives to the parametric t tests, especially in circumstances in which the assumptions of t tests are not valid. For radiologists to properly weigh the evidence in the literature, they must have a basic understanding of the purpose, assumptions, and limitations of each of these statistical tests.

Diagnostic Imaging↗

Characterizing individual scattering events by measuring the amplitude and phase of the electric field diffusing through a random medium.

We describe observations of the amplitude and phase of an electric field diffusing through a three-dimensional random medium, using terahertz time-domain spectroscopy. These measurements are spatially resolved with a resolution smaller than the speckle spot size and temporally resolved with a resolution better than one optical cycle. By computing correlation functions between fields measured at different positions and with different temporal delays, it is possible to obtain information about individual scattering events experienced by the diffusing field. This represents a new method for characterizing a multiply scattered wave.

Diagnostic Imaging↗

Modelling the elastic scattering in diagnostic radiology: the importance of structure form factors.

The importance of structure form factors in describing elastic scattering in diagnostic radiology was studied through a Monte Carlo code built to reproduce scattering in large water samples. The code, developed by us, considers all relevant interactions, including multiple scattering and interference due to scattering by the liquid structure. Geometrical conditions and energies similar to those found in radiology were used. The secondary to primary radiation ratio using the usual free atom approximation and the structure form factor was obtained and both approaches were compared. Calculations of radiological parameters such as the angular distribution of photons incident on the detector and the fraction of scattered photons stopped by anti-scattering grids were also performed considering mammography, thorax and abdomen radiography conditions. The results have shown that S(beta)/P depends on the experimental set-up, being more important for low momentum transfers and sample sizes for which the multiple scattering is not expected to be significant, as in the case of mammography. It was also verified that large samples increase the probability of multiple scattering, masking the structure peak in S(beta) and making the sample structure important just for relatively thin samples. Considering mammography-like geometry, the maximum of the S(beta)/P distribution considering structure form factors occurs around 15 degrees while the correspondent maximum without considering the structure factors occurs around 10 degrees for any sample thickness. S(beta)/P is almost independent of the irradiation field, with the maximum remaining at 15 degrees and 10 degrees for the SFF and FAFF, respectively. The cases studied in this paper stress some conditions in which it is mandatory to use SFF, but since it requires no further significant efforts, the SFF approach is recommended as a standard procedure when describing the elastic scattering process in radiology.

Diagnostic Imaging↗