PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) on radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty chest computed tomographic (CT) examination cases were used. The mean nodule size was 0.81 cm +/- 0.60 (SD) (range, 0.3-2.9 cm). Alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with a continuous rating scale was used to compare the observers' performance in detecting nodules with and without use of CAD. Five board-certified radiologists and five radiology residents participated in an observer performance study. First they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence without using CAD; then they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence by using CAD. RESULTS: For all radiologists, the mean areas under the best-fit alternative free-response ROC curves (Az) without and with CAD were 0.64 +/- 0.08 and 0.67 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five board-certified radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.63 +/- 0.08 and 0.66 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five resident radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.66 +/- 0.04 and 0.68 +/- 0.04, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P =.02). At observer performance analyses, there were no significant differences in Az values obtained either without (P =.61) or with (P =.88) CAD between the board-certified radiologists and the residents. For all radiologists, in the detection of pulmonary nodules 1.0 cm in diameter or smaller, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.60 +/- 0.11 and 0.64 +/- 0.11, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Use of the CAD system improved the board-certified radiologists' and residents' detection of pulmonary nodules at chest CT. Copyright RSNA, 2004
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) on radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty chest computed tomographic (CT) examination cases were used. The mean nodule size was 0.81 cm +/- 0.60 (SD) (range, 0.3-2.9 cm). Alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with a continuous rating scale was used to compare the observers' performance in detecting nodules with and without use of CAD. Five board-certified radiologists and five radiology residents participated in an observer performance study. First they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence without using CAD; then they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence by using CAD. RESULTS: For all radiologists, the mean areas under the best-fit alternative free-response ROC curves (Az) without and with CAD were 0.64 +/- 0.08 and 0.67 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five board-certified radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.63 +/- 0.08 and 0.66 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five resident radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.66 +/- 0.04 and 0.68 +/- 0.04, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P =.02). At observer performance analyses, there were no significant differences in Az values obtained either without (P =.61) or with (P =.88) CAD between the board-certified radiologists and the residents. For all radiologists, in the detection of pulmonary nodules 1.0 cm in diameter or smaller, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.60 +/- 0.11 and 0.64 +/- 0.11, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Use of the CAD system improved the board-certified radiologists' and residents' detection of pulmonary nodules at chest CT. Copyright RSNA, 2004
Authors: A R Larici; M Amato; P Ordóñez; F Maggi; L Menchini; A Caulo; L Calandriello; G Vallati; S Giunta; M Crecco; L Bonomo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Christian D Klose; Alexander D Klose; Uwe J Netz; Alexander K Scheel; Jurgen Beuthan; Andreas H Hielscher Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2010 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.170