Literature DB >> 26158046

Comparison of semiparametric receiver operating characteristic models on observer data.

Frank W Samuelson1, Xin He1.   

Abstract

The evaluation of medical imaging devices often involves studies that measure the ability of observers to perform a signal detection task on images obtained from those devices. Data from such studies are frequently regressed ordinally using two-sample receiver operating characteristic (ROC) models. We applied some of these models to a number of randomly chosen data sets from medical imaging and evaluated how well they fit using the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria and cross-validation. We find that for many observer data sets, a single-parameter model is sufficient and that only some studies exhibit evidence for the use of models with more than a single parameter. In particular, the single-parameter power-law model frequently well describes observer data. The power-law model has an asymmetric ROC curve and a constant mean-to-sigma ratio seen in studies analyzed with the bi-normal model. It is identical or very similar to special cases of other two-parameter models.

Keywords:  Akaike information criterion; cross-validation; receiver operating characteristic models

Year:  2014        PMID: 26158046      PMCID: PMC4479023          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.1.3.031004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)        ISSN: 2329-4302


  19 in total

1.  A contaminated binormal model for ROC data: Part II. A formal model.

Authors:  D D Dorfman; K S Berbaum
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  "Proper" Binormal ROC Curves: Theory and Maximum-Likelihood Estimation.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.223

3.  Digital mammography: observer performance study of the effects of pixel size on the characterization of malignant and benign microcalcifications.

Authors:  H P Chan; M A Helvie; N Petrick; B Sahiner; D D Adler; C Paramagul; M A Roubidoux; C E Blane; L K Joynt; T E Wilson; L M Hadjiiski; M M Goodsitt
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Decision processes in perception.

Authors:  J SWETS; W P TANNER; T G BIRDSALL
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1961-09       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Rafferty; Jeong Mi Park; Liane E Philpotts; Steven P Poplack; Jules H Sumkin; Elkan F Halpern; Loren T Niklason
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  A general regression methodology for ROC curve estimation.

Authors:  A N Tosteson; C B Begg
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1988 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: their ROCs and implied models.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 8.  Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: implications for theory and measurement of performance.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 17.737

9.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Automated detection of sclerotic metastases in the thoracolumbar spine at CT.

Authors:  Joseph E Burns; Jianhua Yao; Tatjana S Wiese; Hector E Muñoz; Elizabeth C Jones; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  3 in total

1.  Generalized Roe and Metz receiver operating characteristic model: analytic link between simulated decision scores and empirical AUC variances and covariances.

Authors:  Brandon D Gallas; Stephen L Hillis
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-09-25

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

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.