Evaluating image quality in surgical photography: a multivariable analysis of cameras and shooting conditions.

IF 1 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Georgios Kourounis, Ali Ahmed Elmahmudi, Brian Thomson, Samuel J Tingle, Emily K Glover, Balaji Mahendran, Emily Thompson, Syed Hussain Abbas, Dhya Al-Leswas, Charlotte Brown, Mohamed Aly M El Shafei El Zawahry, Fanourios Georgiades, Stephen R Knight, Matta Kuzman, Ruth Owen, Emmanouil Psaltis, James Hunter, Hassan Ugail, Colin Wilson
{"title":"Evaluating image quality in surgical photography: a multivariable analysis of cameras and shooting conditions.","authors":"Georgios Kourounis, Ali Ahmed Elmahmudi, Brian Thomson, Samuel J Tingle, Emily K Glover, Balaji Mahendran, Emily Thompson, Syed Hussain Abbas, Dhya Al-Leswas, Charlotte Brown, Mohamed Aly M El Shafei El Zawahry, Fanourios Georgiades, Stephen R Knight, Matta Kuzman, Ruth Owen, Emmanouil Psaltis, James Hunter, Hassan Ugail, Colin Wilson","doi":"10.1080/17453054.2025.2462060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Use of mobile devices with high-quality cameras has expanded medical photography. We investigate the impact of different devices and conditions on photograph quality in a surgical setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fourteen surgeons across six centres scored photograph quality of kidneys donated for transplantation. Images were captured using an iPhone, iPad, or DSLR camera on automatic modes under varying lighting conditions. In blinded A/B testing, surgeons selected the image perceived more clinically useful for remote organ quality assessment and rated each on a 5-point Likert scale. Quality was objectively analysed using two computer vision referenceless quality assessment tools (BRISQUE & NIMA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 369 photographs, mobile device images were rated higher quality by surgeons (78.4%) compared to DSLR (9.4%, p < 0.001). Multilevel regression using BRISQUE showed higher quality for iPhones (β = -5.86, p < 0.001) and iPads (β = -3.90, p < 0.001) versus DSLR. Room lighting improved quality over direct overhead illumination with theatre lights (β = 17.87, p < 0.001). Inter-rater (Gwet AC = 0.78) and intra-rater (Cohen's κ = 0.86) agreements were high.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Smartphones can produce high quality photographs. These findings should reassure clinicians that smartphone devices do not compromise photograph quality and support their use in clinical practice and image analysis research.</p>","PeriodicalId":43868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17453054.2025.2462060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Use of mobile devices with high-quality cameras has expanded medical photography. We investigate the impact of different devices and conditions on photograph quality in a surgical setting.

Methods: Fourteen surgeons across six centres scored photograph quality of kidneys donated for transplantation. Images were captured using an iPhone, iPad, or DSLR camera on automatic modes under varying lighting conditions. In blinded A/B testing, surgeons selected the image perceived more clinically useful for remote organ quality assessment and rated each on a 5-point Likert scale. Quality was objectively analysed using two computer vision referenceless quality assessment tools (BRISQUE & NIMA).

Results: Of 369 photographs, mobile device images were rated higher quality by surgeons (78.4%) compared to DSLR (9.4%, p < 0.001). Multilevel regression using BRISQUE showed higher quality for iPhones (β = -5.86, p < 0.001) and iPads (β = -3.90, p < 0.001) versus DSLR. Room lighting improved quality over direct overhead illumination with theatre lights (β = 17.87, p < 0.001). Inter-rater (Gwet AC = 0.78) and intra-rater (Cohen's κ = 0.86) agreements were high.

Discussion: Smartphones can produce high quality photographs. These findings should reassure clinicians that smartphone devices do not compromise photograph quality and support their use in clinical practice and image analysis research.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine
Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The Journal is a quarterly, international, peer-reviewed journal that acts as a vehicle for the interchange of information and ideas in the production, manipulation, storage and transport of images for medical education, records and research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信