Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Although field area and object thickness are important parameters in comparisons of techniques for optimal reduction of scattered radiation to the image, they are in practice seldom varied. For this reason, we suggest that contrast degradation (CDF) and contrast improvement (CIF) factors be more frequently used and appropriately defined to make the dependence of CDF and CIF on field area (collimation) and object thickness (compression) explicit. Definitions are formulated and the results of experiments and Monte Carlo calculations (comprising effects of collimation, compression, air gap, antiscatter grid, detector thickness) cited to illustrate their usefulness. Currently used expressions for CIF (derived assuming monoenergetic radiation) lack a factor to account for the change in primary contrast caused by the antiscatter method when this affects the energy distribution of the transmitted primary photons (grids and compression) or the fractions of photon energy imparted to the detector (when comparing different detectors). Values of this factor are calculated for some cases. Also, the appropriate choice of physical quantity to be used in the formulae for CDF and CIF is discussed. The energy imparted to the detector is advocated since this is directly related to the detector signals forming the image on, e.g. the x-ray film.
Carlsson et al. (Tue,) studied this question.