PubMed · 8705599
Light source-induced error in computer-assisted image analysis with a video-based system.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that two different light sources, an alternating current fluorescent viewbox and a direct current halogen viewbox, do not differ with respect to their ability to illuminate reproducibly a radiograph during image capture. STUDY DESIGN: Two radiographs were taken: one with four hydroxyapatite chips mounted against a dry mandible and one without the chips. They were digitally subtracted with a video-based imaging system. The procedure was repeated at different times. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference among optical density measurements was found when the alternating current fluorescent viewbox (p < 0.001) was used and was related to light intensity variation. Such effect was not observed with the direct current halogen viewbox (p = 0.873). CONCLUSION: Study design efficiency was increased by 212% with the use of the direct current halogen viewbox so that to detect a specified treatment effect with a given level of statistical confidence, the sample size has to be 2.12 times greater if the alternating current fluorescent viewbox is used.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F A Stutz, A F Hefti, C H Gibbs. 1996. Light source-induced error in computer-assisted image analysis with a video-based system.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(96)80030-8
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.