PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system on the diagnostic performance of radiologists for the estimation of the malignancy of pulmonary nodules on thin-section helical computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved use of the CT database; informed specific study-related consent was waived. The institutional review board approved participation of radiologists; informed consent was obtained from all observers. Thirty-three (18 malignant, 15 benign) pulmonary nodules of less than 3.0 cm in maximal diameter were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with a continuous rating scale was used to compare observer performance for the estimation of the likelihood of malignancy first without and then with the CAD system. The participants were 10 board-certified radiologists and nine radiology residents. RESULTS: For all 19 participants, the mean area under the best-fit ROC curve (A(z)) values achieved without and with the CAD system were 0.843 +/- 0.097 (standard deviation) and 0.924 +/- 0.043, respectively. The difference was significant (P = .021). The mean A(z) values achieved without and with the CAD system were 0.910 +/- 0.052 and 0.944 +/- 0.040, respectively, for the 10 board-certified radiologists (P = .190) and 0.768 +/- 0.078 and 0.901 +/- 0.036, respectively, for the nine radiology residents (P = .009). CONCLUSION: Use of the CAD system significantly (P = .009) improved the diagnostic performance of radiology residents for assessment of the malignancy of pulmonary nodules; however, it did not improve that of board-certified radiologists. (c) RSNA, 2006.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system on the diagnostic performance of radiologists for the estimation of the malignancy of pulmonary nodules on thin-section helical computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved use of the CT database; informed specific study-related consent was waived. The institutional review board approved participation of radiologists; informed consent was obtained from all observers. Thirty-three (18 malignant, 15 benign) pulmonary nodules of less than 3.0 cm in maximal diameter were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with a continuous rating scale was used to compare observer performance for the estimation of the likelihood of malignancy first without and then with the CAD system. The participants were 10 board-certified radiologists and nine radiology residents. RESULTS: For all 19 participants, the mean area under the best-fit ROC curve (A(z)) values achieved without and with the CAD system were 0.843 +/- 0.097 (standard deviation) and 0.924 +/- 0.043, respectively. The difference was significant (P = .021). The mean A(z) values achieved without and with the CAD system were 0.910 +/- 0.052 and 0.944 +/- 0.040, respectively, for the 10 board-certified radiologists (P = .190) and 0.768 +/- 0.078 and 0.901 +/- 0.036, respectively, for the nine radiology residents (P = .009). CONCLUSION: Use of the CAD system significantly (P = .009) improved the diagnostic performance of radiology residents for assessment of the malignancy of pulmonary nodules; however, it did not improve that of board-certified radiologists. (c) RSNA, 2006.
Authors: Levent A Guner; Nese Ilgin Karabacak; Ozgur U Akdemir; Pinar Senkul Karagoz; Sinan A Kocaman; Atiye Cengel; Mustafa Unlu Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: José Raniery Ferreira; Marcelo Costa Oliveira; Paulo Mazzoncini de Azevedo-Marques Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Ernst Th Scholten; Nanda Horeweg; Harry J de Koning; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Matthijs Oudkerk; Willem P Th M Mali; Pim A de Jong Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-09-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sushravya Raghunath; Fabien Maldonado; Srinivasan Rajagopalan; Ronald A Karwoski; Zackary S DePew; Brian J Bartholmai; Tobias Peikert; Richard A Robb Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 15.609