Use of Full-quality DICOM Images Compared to Minimally Compressed Mammograms in JPEG Format for Radiology Training: A Study From Radiologist and Radiographer Perspectives

Published:December 23, 2022DOI:


      Running online training in mammography interpretation poses a challenge to radiologists and reporting radiographers due to the large size of digital mammograms in DICOM format and limited bandwidth capabilities of the users for image transmission. This study aims to compare image quality between the full-quality with minimal compressed JPEG and DICOM format of mammograms on a diagnostic monitor through the evaluation of radiologists and radiographers.


      Twelve participants including six radiologists and six radiographers participated as observers in this study. The observers viewed 60 2D digital mammography screening cases (22 cancer and 38 normal cases) in DICOM and minimal compressed JPEG formats on a 5MP diagnostic monitor. A 5-point Likert scale was provided for observers to compare the quality of mammograms between the two formats, with text anchors indicating to one image being significantly better, slightly better or of equal quality in terms of technical and diagnostic aspects. Nonparametric descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the ratings of radiologists and radiographers in different characteristics of mammograms of two image formats.


      The DICOM and JPEG images were statistically equivalent through ratings from radiographers in brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, no significant distortion, no significant noise, and background homogeneity in all mammograms. Similarly, most radiologists rated DICOM and JPEG images clinically and statistically equivalent with respect to difficulty of interpretation, brightness, contrast, dynamic range, sharpness, the appearance of Cooper's ligaments, visibility of subtle microcalcifications, visibility of structures at the margins of the breast. Normal cases were marginally favored by radiologists in DICOM format (ranging from 0.4% to 5.3%) while cancer cases in JPEG (ranging from 0.8% to 7.6%) received slightly higher rating.


      Findings showed that baseline full-quality with minimal compression JPEG was equivalent to the DICOM format of full-field digital mammograms which suggests that this type of JPEG could be used for online training and education in radiology.

      Key Words


      DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine), JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group), FFDM (Full-Field Digital Mammography), MLO (Medio-lateral oblique), CC (Cranio-caudal)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Academic Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Said A
        • Pearlman WA.
        An image multiresolution representation for lossless and lossy compression.
        IEEE Trans Image Process. 1996; 5: 1303-1310
        • Sung MM
        • Kim HJ
        • Yoo SK
        • et al.
        Clinical evaluation of compression ratios using JPEG2000 on computed radiography chest images.
        J Digit Imaging. 2002; 15: 78-83
      1. American-College-of-Radiology. ACR technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging. Iowa, USA: The American College of Radiology; 2007.

        • Trieu PDY
        • Tapia K
        • Frazer H
        • Lee W
        • Brennan P.
        Improvement of cancer detection on mammograms via BREAST test sets.
        Acad Radiol. 2019; 26: e341-e3e7
      2. Brennan PC, Trieu PD, Tapia K, Ryan J, Mello-Thoms C, Lee W. BREAST: a novel strategy to improve the detection of breast cancer. In: Hiroshi Fujita TH, Chisako Muramatsu, eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science - The 12th International Workshop on Breast Imaging. 8539: Gifu, Japan: Springer, 2014; 438-43.

        • Lewis SJ
        • Borecky N
        • Li T
        • Barron ML
        • Brennan P
        • Trieu PD.
        Radiologist self-training: a study of cancer detection when reading mammograms at work clinics or workshops.
        J Cancer Educ. 2022;
        • Brettle DS
        • Ward SC
        • Parkin GJ
        • Cowen AR
        • Sumsion HJ.
        A clinical comparison between conventional and digital mammography utilizing computed radiography.
        Br J Radiol. 1994; 67: 464-468
        • Skaane P
        • Skjennald A.
        Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program–the Oslo II Study.
        Radiology. 2004; 232: 197-204
        • Suryanarayanan S
        • Karellas A
        • Vedantham S
        • Waldrop SM
        • D'Orsi CJ
        A perceptual evaluation of JPEG 2000 image compression for digital mammography: contrast-detail characteristics.
        J Digit Imaging. 2004; 17: 64-70
        • Fidler A
        • Likar B
        • Pernus F
        • Skaleric U.
        Comparative evaluation of JPEG and JPEG2000 compression in quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002; 31: 379-384
        • Kimpe T
        • Tuytschaever T.
        Increasing the number of gray shades in medical display systems–how much is enough?.
        J Digit Imaging. 2007; 20: 422-432