A comparison of two data analyses from two observer performance studies using Jackknife ROC and JAFROC.

The authors compared two methodological approaches, Jackknife ROC and JAFROC, in analyzing data ascertained during FROC (free-response receiver operating characteristics) type studies. Observer rating data obtained from two observer performance studies were analyzed. During the first study, seven radiologists interpreted 120 mammography examinations depicting 57 masses under five different conditions with and without the results of computer-aided detection (CAD). In the second study, eight radiologists interpreted 110 examinations depicting 51 masses under six different display conditions with and without CAD results. Readers rated the detection task in a FROC type response. Jackknife ROC (using the software of LABMRMC with the highest rating per case) and JAFROC were used to compute differences, if any, in summary performance levels among all reading modes in each study as well as for all paired data sets. The results of the different analytical approaches are compared. The overall results for all modes were significantly different for the first study (p < 0.05) and not significant (p > 0.05) for the second study using either analytical approach. In the first study, the performance levels represented by three paired data sets were significantly different (p < 0.05) when computed using LABMRMC and four pairs were significantly different (p < 0.05) using JAFROC. In eight of ten pairs, JAFROC produced lower p values than LABMRMC. In the second study, LABMRMC showed no significant differences for any paired data sets and JAFROC showed a significant difference for one pair. In 15 of 16 pairs, p values computed by JAFROC were lower than those computed by LABMRMC.