Abonnement à la biblothèque: Guest
Portail numérique Bibliothèque numérique eBooks Revues Références et comptes rendus Collections
Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering
SJR: 0.207 SNIP: 0.376 CiteScore™: 0.79

ISSN Imprimer: 0278-940X
ISSN En ligne: 1943-619X

Volume 47, 2019 Volume 46, 2018 Volume 45, 2017 Volume 44, 2016 Volume 43, 2015 Volume 42, 2014 Volume 41, 2013 Volume 40, 2012 Volume 39, 2011 Volume 38, 2010 Volume 37, 2009 Volume 36, 2008 Volume 35, 2007 Volume 34, 2006 Volume 33, 2005 Volume 32, 2004 Volume 31, 2003 Volume 30, 2002 Volume 29, 2001 Volume 28, 2000 Volume 27, 1999 Volume 26, 1998 Volume 25, 1997 Volume 24, 1996 Volume 23, 1995

Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering

DOI: 10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.v38.i2.20
pages 127-141

Quality Assessment in Magnetic Resonance Images

Neelam Sinha
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
A.G. Ramakrishnan
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India


Assessing quality of medical images is critical because the subsequent course of actions depend on it. Extensive use of clinical magnetic resonance (MR) imaging warrants a study in image indices used for MR images. The quality of MR images assumes particular significance in the determination of their reliability for diagnostics, response to therapies, synchronization across different imaging cycles, optimization of interventional imaging, and image restoration. In this paper, we review various techniques developed for the assessment of MR image quality. The reported quality indices can be broadly classified as subjective/objective, automatic/semi-automatic, region-of-interest/non-region-of-interest−based, full-reference/no-reference and HVS incorporated/non-HVS incorporated. The trade-of across the various indices lies in the computational complexity, assumptions, repeatability, and resemblance to human perception. Because images are eventually viewed by the human eye, it is found that it is important to incorporate aspects of human visual response, sensitivity, and characteristics in computing quality indices. Additionally, no-reference metrics are the most relevant due to the lack of availability of a golden standard against which images could be compared. Techniques that are objective and automatic are preferred for their repeatability and to eliminate avoidable errors due to factors like stress, which arise in human intervention.