Quantitative Analysis of Minimum Detectable Uptake Ratios for Nuclear Medicine Imaging Systems

  • F. R. Whitehead


A diagnostic medical image is nothing more, nor less, than a display of measured data, and specifically for nuclear medicine it is a display of radio-pharmaceutical uptake as a function of position within some object. As with any measuring device, the important characteristics of an imaging system are its precision, accuracy, and range of measurement scale. When the output of an imaging system is viewed by a human observer, the measured quantity of interest is contrast, or incremental change of input signal level divided by the average signal level. Thus the precision of the imaging systems’ measurement capability is determined by the minimum detectable contrast which can be observed, the imaging system’s accuracy, which is determined by the fidelity with which a specific object contrast is represented in the image, and the range of measurement scale, which is simply the dynamic range, as determined by the largest value of object contrast which can be accurately reproduced in the image.


Uptake Ratio Count Density Threshold Contrast Resolution Element Contrast Modulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beck, R.N., Schuh, M.W., Cohen, J.D., Lembares, N. (1969), Effects of scattered radiation on scintillation detector response, Medical Radioisotope Scintigraphy, Vol. 1, p. 595. IAEA, Vienna.Google Scholar
  2. Dresser, M.M. (1972), Scattering effects in radioisotope imaging, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan (available from University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan).Google Scholar
  3. Jones, J. P., Brill, A.B., Johnston, R.E. (1975), The validity of an equivalent point source (EPS) assumption used in quantitative scanning, Phys. Med. Biol, 20: 3, 455.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Polaroid Corporation, Technical Publication T570–1, June 1976.Google Scholar
  5. Revesz, G., Haas, C. (1972), Television display of radiographic images with superimposed simulated lesions, Radiology 102: 1, 197.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Rollo, F. D., Schulz, A. G. (1970), A contrast efficiency function for quantitatively measuring the spatial resolution characteristics of scanning systems, J. Nucl. Med. 11: 2, 53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Rose, A. (1974), Vision, Human and Electronic, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Schade, O.H., Sr. (1956), Optical and photoelectric analogue of the eye, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 46: 9, 721.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schade, O.H., Sr. (1964), An evaluation of photographic image quality and resolving power, J. Soc. Motion Pict. Telev. Eng. 73: 2, 81.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. R. Whitehead
    • 1
  1. 1.Searle Diagnostics, Inc.Des PlainesUSA

Personalised recommendations