|
|
|
|
|
by ska
2311 days ago
|
|
It gets even worse than that sometimes. For example, I remember a study from back when digital xray was getting going, where radiologist were asked to say which processing they liked better (since none of them looked quite like the very non-linear film versions) and scored on performance. They didn't perform best on the types they liked best. This wasn't a great study in terms of power, but it was interesting. I've met plenty of rad-oncs and radiologists who are convinced they can "read through the noise" just fine, and want consistent imaging more than artifact reduction. I'm not sure how empirically this has ever been tested. |
|
The advantages they gave were in every other way (physical storage, availability, duplication, speed at which they could be accessed etc).