@article{oai:repo.qst.go.jp:00043830,
 author = {Ono, Koji and Yoshitake, Takayasu and Akahane, Keiichi and Yamada, Yasunari and Maeda, Toru and Kai, Michiaki and Kusama, Tomoko and 赤羽 恵一 and 甲斐 倫明 and 草間 朋子},
 issue = {934},
 journal = {British Journal of Radiology},
 month = {Oct},
 note = {The purpose of this study was to compare hard copy images from a flat-panel detector digital radiography system with conventional radiography, photofluorographic radiography and storage phosphor radiography for the detection of simulated lung adenocarcinoma lesions and also for radiation dose. To test the diagnostic performance of these four systems, the authors used 15 types of lung adenocarcinoma phantom according to Noguchi's classification and an anthropomorphic chest phantom. The visual evaluation of tumour detectability by four radiologists and two general thoracic surgeons was examined with a five-level confidence scale. Lung doses were measured with glass dosemeters for the chest radiology systems under the conditions used by each hospital and centre. Our results indicated that flat-panel detector digital radiography and storage phosphor radiography are not necessarily superior to conventional radiography and photofluorographic radiography for detecting lung adenocarcinomas when only hard copy images are used, and this suggests a need to carefully optimize chest radiography.},
 pages = {922--927},
 title = {Comparison of a digital flat-panel versus screen-film, photofluorography and storage-phosphor systems by detection of simulated lung adenocarcinoma lesions using hard copy images},
 volume = {78},
 year = {2005}
}