UK Imaging Informatics Group
DICOM WG-17 3D Manufacturing: File Fo... PreviousNext
UK Imaging Informatics Group > Questions & Answers > PACS Procurement & Business Cases >
Message/Author
 Link to this message David Clunie  posted on Friday, April 28, 2017 - 12:26 pm Edit Post Delete Post Print Post
I though this group's followers might be interested in participating in the following survey ...

====To: DICOM WG-17 3D Manufacturing,

On behalf of co-chairs Allan Noordvyk and Justin Ryan, you are
invited/expected/voluntold (please!) to participate in the following
survey: DICOM and 3D Manufacturing File Formats.

Time: 5-10 minutes

Deadline: May 16, 2017

Take Survey:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScBao3KSejKWn23mbgl8VLL4VjsJ8g4RjtqdwK1 LhJMIl4TBQ/viewform?c=0&w=1

We would like your insights into how to best incorporate 3D
manufacturing file formats into the DICOM standard, and thus make it
easier to use medical images to create patient-specific 3D objects and
manage the associated information.

Working Group 17 is charged with updating the DICOM standard with the
above goals in mind. Per our earlier discussions, our expected approach
will involve encapsulating standards already well established in use by
the 3D manufacturing community. That is, we expect to be able to put a
3D printing model file inside a DICOM object when we want to interact
with medical devices/software (e.g. a PACS), and pull out the 3D model
file unchanged when we want to work with non-medical devices/software
(e.g. a printer).

The question: Which 3D model file formats should we encapsulate?

Even after we eliminate file formats that are encumbered by incompatible
license terms*, we are left with a long list of formats that are in use
by someone somewhere. Each seems preferred depending purposes and
equipment, but we lack hard data on this. Many people use more than one
format, depending on circumstances. While we can (and probably will)
support encapsulating multiple file formats, we will want to start with
the most useful and prevalent file formats, and add others later. We'd
also like to completely skip file formats that do not add value over
ones we've already covered.

This survey is to help us prioritize the 3D model file formats supported
in the new standard based on what the medical 3D manufacturing community
feels would be the greatest benefit to the largest number of people.

Thank you for contributing your time to improving interoperability in
medicine.

Cheryl

*To have compatible licensing terms, the file format must be publicly
defined (i.e. not proprietary) and be guaranteed to remain free of
charge to use (e.g. public domain, under a liberal public license, etc.).

Cheryl Kreider Carey, CAE

General Secretary, DICOM Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine

Director, Operations & Administration, MITA Medical Imaging & Technology
Alliance

A Division of NEMA, the association of electrical equipment and medical
imaging manufacturers

1300 North 17th Street, Suite 900

Arlington, VA 22209

Phone: 703.841.3237

Fax: 703.841.3337

ccarey@medicalimaging.org

Check us out on Facebook and Twitter:

Right Scan Right Time MT1
 
Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: