Literature DB >> 23295543

Estimating the relative utility of screening mammography.

Craig K Abbey1,2, Miguel P Eckstein1, John M Boone2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The concept of diagnostic utility is a fundamental component of signal detection theory, going back to some of its earliest works. Attaching utility values to the various possible outcomes of a diagnostic test should, in principle, lead to meaningful approaches to evaluating and comparing such systems. However, in many areas of medical imaging, utility is not used because it is presumed to be unknown.
METHODS: In this work, we estimate relative utility (the utility benefit of a detection relative to that of a correct rejection) for screening mammography using its known relation to the slope of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve at the optimal operating point. The approach assumes that the clinical operating point is optimal for the goal of maximizing expected utility and therefore the slope at this point implies a value of relative utility for the diagnostic task, for known disease prevalence. We examine utility estimation in the context of screening mammography using the Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trials (DMIST) data.
RESULTS: We show how various conditions can influence the estimated relative utility, including characteristics of the rating scale, verification time, probability model, and scope of the ROC curve fit. Relative utility estimates range from 66 to 227.
CONCLUSIONS: We argue for one particular set of conditions that results in a relative utility estimate of 162 (±14%). This is broadly consistent with values in screening mammography determined previously by other means. At the disease prevalence found in the DMIST study (0.59% at 365-day verification), optimal ROC slopes are near unity, suggesting that utility-based assessments of screening mammography will be similar to those found using Youden's index.

Keywords:  observer performance; relative utility; screening mammography

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23295543     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X12470756

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  10 in total

1.  Developing a utility decision framework to evaluate predictive models in breast cancer risk estimation.

Authors:  Yirong Wu; Craig K Abbey; Xianqiao Chen; Jie Liu; David C Page; Oguzhan Alagoz; Peggy Peissig; Adedayo A Onitilo; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-08-17

Review 2.  The Reproducibility of Changes in Diagnostic Figures of Merit Across Laboratory and Clinical Imaging Reader Studies.

Authors:  Frank W Samuelson; Craig K Abbey
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Using Relative Statistics and Approximate Disease Prevalence to Compare Screening Tests.

Authors:  Frank Samuelson; Craig Abbey
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Developing a clinical utility framework to evaluate prediction models in radiogenomics.

Authors:  Yirong Wu; Jie Liu; Alejandro Munoz Del Rio; David C Page; Oguzhan Alagoz; Peggy Peissig; Adedayo A Onitilo; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2015-03-17

5.  A Utility/Cost Analysis of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Algorithms.

Authors:  Craig K Abbey; Yirong Wu; Elizabeth S Burnside; Adam Wunderlich; Frank W Samuelson; John M Boone
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2016-03-24

6.  Comparative statistical properties of expected utility and area under the ROC curve for laboratory studies of observer performance in screening mammography.

Authors:  Craig K Abbey; Brandon D Gallas; John M Boone; Loren T Niklason; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Berkman Sahiner; Frank W Samuelson
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 7.  Estimation of diagnostic test accuracy without full verification: a review of latent class methods.

Authors:  John Collins; Minh Huynh
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Pursuing optimal thresholds to recommend breast biopsy by quantifying the value of tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Yirong Wu; Oguzhan Alagoz; David J Vanness; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2014-03-11

9.  Leveraging Expert Knowledge to Improve Machine-Learned Decision Support Systems.

Authors:  Finn Kuusisto; Inês Dutra; Mai Elezaby; Eneida A Mendonça; Jude Shavlik; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2015-03-25

10.  Diagnostic Validity of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7 (GAD-7) among Pregnant Women.

Authors:  Qiu-Yue Zhong; Bizu Gelaye; Alan M Zaslavsky; Jesse R Fann; Marta B Rondon; Sixto E Sánchez; Michelle A Williams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.