Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Web-based clinical-image viewing is commonplace in large medical centers. As demands for product and performance escalate, physicians, sold on the concept of "any image, anytime, anywhere," fret when image studies cannot be viewed in a time frame to which they are accustomed. Image delivery pathways in large medical centers are oftentimes complicated by multiple networks, multiple picture archiving and communication systems (PACS), and multiple groups responsible for image acquisition and delivery to multiple destinations. When studies are delayed, it may be difficult to rapidly pinpoint bottlenecks. Described here are the tools used to monitor likely failure points in our modality to clinical-image-viewing chain and tools for reporting volume and throughput trends. Though perhaps unique to our environment, we believe that tools of this type are essential for understanding and monitoring image-study flow, reconfiguring resources to achieve better throughput, and planning for anticipated growth. Without such tools, quality clinical-image delivery may not be what it should. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2003 | 10.1007/s10278-003-1724-1 | JOURNAL OF DIGITAL IMAGING |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
clinical-image viewing,imaging throughput,clinical desktop,imageweb | Computer vision,Image flow,Time frame,Computer science,Radiology information systems,Communications system,Artificial intelligence,Throughput,Multimedia,The Internet,Data display | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
16 | 3 | 0897-1889 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
2 | 0.66 | 0 |
Authors | ||
8 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kenneth W. Clark | 1 | 188 | 13.98 |
| David L. Melson | 2 | 2 | 0.66 |
| Stephen M. Moore | 3 | 193 | 14.91 |
| G J Blaine | 4 | 11 | 6.46 |
| Ralph A. Moulton | 5 | 2 | 0.66 |
| William K. Clayton | 6 | 2 | 0.66 |
| Colin S. Peterson | 7 | 2 | 0.66 |
| Bruce A. Vendt | 8 | 179 | 7.67 |