Loading of planar annotations with a multiVolume reference

[deepakri201]

Hi @pieper and @lassoan,

As you know, I am making some additions to the TID1500 plugin to display planar annotations in this PR.

There are some cases where the referenced series consists of multiple volumes, like this example. We have a couple of options for how the data can be loaded, which I would like to get your opinion on:

1. Separate scalar volumes - The user would have the option of loading a single or multiple scalar volumes. They could then toggle the visibility of the referenced scalar volume, and the associated bounding boxes would be displayed accordingly.

2. MultiVolume - SequenceBrowser - The user would scroll through the sequence, and the bounding box visibility would change accordingly from volume to volume.

I personally like the idea of using the Sequence Browser. For instance, if the volumes are over time, then the user can quickly see how the annotations change just by scrolling. Happy to discuss other ideas about how the annotations should be viewed!

[pieper]

Hi @deepakri201 - i agree the Sequences approach sounds good. So I understand there are annotations per-timepoint? Then I would put both the volume and the markups nodes into the sequence so they can be browsed together. Or if there's only one markup then it could be outside the sequence but inside the study folder.

Given the flexibility of SR and the difficulty in identifying the clinical scenario being described by them I think it's good to have the plugins try to detect specific known patterns when possible and not try to make them overly generic.

Also, as things stand now, plugins do not have UIs to present users with options about how to interpret the data. We may need to extend the plugin interface so that users can express their intent when the data is ambiguous.

[deepakri201]

Hi @deepakri201 - i agree the Sequences approach sounds good. So I understand there are annotations per-timepoint? Then I would put both the volume and the markups nodes into the sequence so they can be browsed together. Or if there's only one markup then it could be outside the sequence but inside the study folder.

Given the flexibility of SR and the difficulty in identifying the clinical scenario being described by them I think it's good to have the plugins try to detect specific known patterns when possible and not try to make them overly generic.

Also, as things stand now, plugins do not have UIs to present users with options about how to interpret the data. We may need to extend the plugin interface so that users can express their intent when the data is ambiguous.

Thanks Steve. Yes, the annotations are per-timepoint.