首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Digital Imaging >Human–Computer Interaction in Radiotherapy Target Volume Delineation: A Prospective Multi-institutional Comparison of User Input Devices
【2h】

Human–Computer Interaction in Radiotherapy Target Volume Delineation: A Prospective Multi-institutional Comparison of User Input Devices

机译:放射治疗目标体积描绘中的人机交互:用户输入设备的前瞻性多机构比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The purpose of this study was the prospective comparison of objective and subjective effects of target volume region of interest (ROI) delineation using mouse–keyboard and pen–tablet user input devices (UIDs). The study was designed as a prospective test/retest sequence, with Wilcoxon signed rank test for matched-pair comparison. Twenty-one physician-observers contoured target volume ROIs on four standardized cases (representative of brain, prostate, lung, and head and neck malignancies) twice: once using QWERTY keyboard/scroll-wheel mouse UID and once with pen–tablet UID (DTX2100, Wacom Technology Corporation, Vancouver, WA, USA). Active task time, ROI manipulation task data, and subjective survey data were collected. One hundred twenty-nine target volume ROI sets were collected, with 62 paired pen–tablet/mouse–keyboard sessions. Active contouring time was reduced using the pen–tablet UID, with mean ± SD active contouring time of 26 ± 23 min, compared with 32 ± 25 with the mouse (p ≤ 0.01). Subjective estimation of time spent was also reduced from 31 ± 26 with mouse to 27 ± 22 min with the pen (p = 0.02). Task analysis showed ROI correction task reduction (p = 0.045) and decreased panning and scrolling tasks (p < 0.01) with the pen–tablet; drawing, window/level changes, and zoom commands were unchanged (p = n.s.) Volumetric analysis demonstrated no detectable differences in ROI volume nor intra- or inter-observer volumetric coverage. Fifty-two of 62 (84%) users preferred the tablet for each contouring task; 5 of 62 (8%) denoted no preference, and 5 of 62 (8%) chose the mouse interface. The pen–tablet UID reduced active contouring time and reduced correction of ROIs, without substantially altering ROI volume/coverage.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10278-010-9341-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
机译:这项研究的目的是使用鼠标键盘和数位板用户输入设备(UID)对目标体积目标区域(ROI)轮廓线的客观和主观效果进行前瞻性比较。该研究被设计为前瞻性测试/重新测试序列,Wilcoxon符号秩检验用于配对比较。 21位医生观察员两次概述了四种标准化病例(代表脑,前列腺,肺以及头颈部恶性肿瘤)的目标体积ROI:两次使用QWERTY键盘/滚轮鼠标UID,一次使用笔-平板电脑UID(DTX2100 (美国华盛顿州温哥华市Wacom技术公司)。收集活动任务时间,ROI操作任务数据和主观调查数据。收集了129个目标体积ROI集,并进行了62对笔-平板/鼠标-键盘配对。使用笔-平板电脑UID可以减少主动轮廓绘制的时间,平均±SD主动轮廓绘制时间为26±23 min,相比之下,鼠标的有效轮廓绘制时间为32±25(p≤0.01)。主观花费的时间估计也从用鼠标的31±26分钟减少到使用笔的27±22分钟(p = 0.02)。任务分析显示,使用笔-平板电脑可以减少ROI校正任务(p = 0.045)并减少平移和滚动任务(p <0.01);绘图,窗口/级别更改和缩放命令未更改(p = n.s。)。体积分析表明,ROI体积和观察者内部或观察者之间的体积覆盖率均未检测到差异。 62位使用者中有52位(84%)的使用者喜欢使用数位板来完成轮廓作业; 62(8%)中的5表示没有偏好,而62(8%)中的5选择了鼠标界面。数位板UID可以减少主动轮廓绘制的时间并减少ROI的校正,而不会实质性地改变ROI的体积/覆盖率。电子补充材料本文的在线版本(doi:10.1007 / s10278-010-9341-2)包含补充材料,该材料是可供授权用户使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号