Literature DB >> 2332308

Effect of observer instruction on ROC study of chest images.

D Gur1, H E Rockette, W F Good, B S Slasky, L A Cooperstein, W H Straub, N A Obuchowski, C E Metz.   

Abstract

Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis has been used in many medical imaging applications during the past decade. In order to ensure that reader-confidence ratings are analyzable (well distributed to meet convergence requirements of curve-fitting algorithms) and meaningful (limit extrapolation of the data), many investigators train readers specifically for this purpose. No experimental data are available concerning the possible effects of such training on the results of ROC studies. We performed a multi-observer, multi-disease study in which 300 chest images were rated by four radiologists before and after they were trained to provide well-distributed confidence ratings. The results indicate that for our data set, reader and disease-specific accuracy was not significantly affected by the training process for interstitial disease and pneumothoraces. However, the accuracy of two readers was significantly affected for the detection of nodules (P less than 0.05), and the overall accuracy of one reader was significantly affected for the classification of normal versus abnormal images (P less than 0.01). Thus, in spite of the difficulties associated with the performance of ROC studies in a free-reading environment, one should carefully consider the possible effects of any intervention on the results prior to conducting ROC studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2332308     DOI: 10.1097/00004424-199003000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  5 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review: bias in imaging studies - the effect of manipulating clinical context, recall bias and reporting intensity.

Authors:  Darren Boone; Steve Halligan; Susan Mallett; Stuart A Taylor; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  ROC analysis in medical imaging: a tutorial review of the literature.

Authors:  Charles E Metz
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2007-10-27

3.  Forced choice and ordinal discrete rating assessment of image quality: a comparison.

Authors:  D Gur; D A Rubin; B H Kart; A M Peterson; C R Fuhrman; H E Rockette; J L King
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  The "laboratory" effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations.

Authors:  David Gur; Andriy I Bandos; Cathy S Cohen; Christiane M Hakim; Lara A Hardesty; Marie A Ganott; Ronald L Perrin; William R Poller; Ratan Shah; Jules H Sumkin; Luisa P Wallace; Howard E Rockette
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Binary and multi-category ratings in a laboratory observer performance study: a comparison.

Authors:  David Gur; Andriy I Bandos; Jill L King; Amy H Klym; Cathy S Cohen; Christiane M Hakim; Lara A Hardesty; Marie A Ganott; Ronald L Perrin; William R Poller; Ratan Shah; Jules H Sumkin; Luisa P Wallace; Howard E Rockette
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 4.071

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.