Skip to main content
. 2015 Oct 26;16(6):1216–1225. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2015.16.6.1216

Table 3. Qualitative Image Analysis Scores Compared between Reduced FOV and Full FOV Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Sequences.

Anatomic Structures Lesion Conspicuity Artifacts Total Image Quality Score Subjective Clinical Utility
Reduced FOV (b = 0 s/mm2)
 Reader 1 2.95 ± 0.83 3.19 ± 0.99 2.79 ± 0.78 8.93 ± 2.20 3.40 ± 0.68
 Reader 2 2.57 ± 0.91 2.99 ± 1.14 2.50 ± 0.71 8.06 ± 2.16 3.44 ± 0.75
 Average 2.76 ± 0.79 3.11 ± 0.99 2.65 ± 0.68 8.51 ± 2.05 3.41 ± 0.64
Full FOV (b = 0 s/mm2)
 Reader 1 2.20 ± 0.63 2.55 ± 1.10 2.41 ± 0.74 7.16 ± 2.03 2.87 ± 0.86
 Reader 2 2.16 ± 0.69 2.55 ± 1.21 2.40 ± 0.69 7.11 ± 1.87 3.40 ± 0.77
 Average 2.18 ± 0.59 2.55 ± 1.07 2.41 ± 0.63 7.13 ± 1.83 3.14 ± 0.70
P value* < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Reduced FOV (b = 400 s/mm2)
 Reader 1 2.89 ± 0.69 3.09 ± 0.95 2.95 ± 0.65 8.93 ± 1.74 N/A
 Reader 2 2.74 ± 0.69 3.21 ± 0.89 2.71 ± 0.67 8.65 ± 1.78
 Average 2.81 ± 0.64 3.15 ± 0.79 2.83 ± 0.57 8.79 ± 1.60
Full FOV (b = 500 s/mm2)
 Reader 1 2.47 ± 0.50 2.70 ± 0.90 2.62 ± 0.56 7.78 ± 1.45
 Reader 2 2.65 ± 0.62 3.09 ± 1.00 2.82 ± 0.53 8.56 ± 1.47
 Average 2.56 ± 0.47 2.89 ± 0.86 2.72 ± 0.45 8.17 ± 1.31
P value* < 0.001 0.002 0.061 < 0.001

Data are mean ± standard deviation. *Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed between reduced FOV and full FOV sequences using averaged image quality scores of two readers, Scoring of subjective clinical utility was performed once for each DWI sequence. DWI = diffusion-weighted imaging, FOV = field-of-view, N/A = not available