Literature DB >> 26346933

Evaluating Estimation Techniques in Medical Imaging Without a Gold Standard: Experimental Validation.

John W Hoppin1, Matthew A Kupinski2, Donald W Wilson3, Todd Peterson3, Benjamin Gershman4, George Kastis3, Eric Clarkson5, Lars Furenlid2, Harrison H Barrett5.   

Abstract

Imaging is often used for the purpose of estimating the value of some parameter of interest. For example, a cardiologist may measure the ejection fraction (EF) of the heart to quantify how much blood is being pumped out of the heart on each stroke. In clinical practice, however, it is difficult to evaluate an estimation method because the gold standard is not known, e.g., a cardiologist does not know the true EF of a patient. An estimation method is typically evaluated by plotting its results against the results of another (more accepted) estimation method. This approach results in the use of one set of estimates as the pseudo-gold standard. We have developed a maximum-likelihood approach for comparing different estimation methods to the gold standard without the use of the gold standard. In previous works we have displayed the results of numerous simulation studies indicating the method can precisely and accurately estimate the parameters of a regression line without a gold standard, i.e., without the x-axis. In an attempt to further validate our method we have designed an experiment performing volume estimation using a physical phantom and two imaging systems (SPECT,CT).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Regression analysis; image quality; parameter estimation

Year:  2003        PMID: 26346933      PMCID: PMC4558919          DOI: 10.1117/12.480330

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng        ISSN: 0277-786X


  14 in total

1.  Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable?

Authors:  N G Bellenger; M I Burgess; S G Ray; A Lahiri; A J Coats; J G Cleland; D J Pennell
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 29.983

2.  SemiSPECT: A Small-animal Imaging System Based on Eight CdZnTe Pixel Detectors.

Authors:  Todd E Peterson; Hyunki Kim; Michael J Crawford; Benjamin M Gershman; William C J Hunter; H Bradford Barber; Lars R Furenlid; Donald W Wilson; James M Woolfenden; Harrison H Barrett
Journal:  IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec (1997)       Date:  2002-11-10

3.  Random effects models in latent class analysis for evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Y Qu; M Tan; M H Kutner
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis without truth.

Authors:  R M Henkelman; I Kay; M J Bronskill
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1990 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Gated myocardial perfusion tomography for the assessment of left ventricular function and volumes: comparison with echocardiography.

Authors:  E Cwajg; J Cwajg; Z X He; W S Hwang; F Keng; S F Nagueh; M S Verani
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction, and regional wall motion calculated with gated technetium-99m tetrofosmin SPECT in reperfused acute myocardial infarction at super-acute phase: comparison with left ventriculography.

Authors:  M Abe; Y Kazatani; H Fukuda; H Tatsuno; H Habara; H Shinbata
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction determined by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT with Tl-201 and Tc-99m sestamibi: comparison with first-pass radionuclide angiography.

Authors:  Z X He; E Cwajg; J S Preslar; J J Mahmarian; M S Verani
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Computed tomography, ultrasound, and scintigraphy of the liver in patients with colon or breast carcinoma: a prospective comparison.

Authors:  P O Alderson; D F Adams; B J McNeil; R Sanders; S S Siegelman; H J Finberg; S J Hessel; H L Abrams
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Estimation in medical imaging without a gold standard.

Authors:  Matthew A Kupinski; John W Hoppin; Eric Clarkson; Harrison H Barrett; George A Kastis
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.173

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Issam El Naqa
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  A no-gold-standard technique for objective assessment of quantitative nuclear-medicine imaging methods.

Authors:  Abhinav K Jha; Brian Caffo; Eric C Frey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Task-based evaluation of segmentation algorithms for diffusion-weighted MRI without using a gold standard.

Authors:  Abhinav K Jha; Matthew A Kupinski; Jeffrey J Rodríguez; Renu M Stephen; Alison T Stopeck
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Comparing cardiac ejection fraction estimation algorithms without a gold standard.

Authors:  Matthew A Kupinski; John W Hoppin; Joshua Krasnow; Seth Dahlberg; Jeffrey A Leppo; Michael A King; Eric Clarkson; Harrison H Barrett
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for computer algorithm comparisons.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski; Anthony P Reeves; Erich P Huang; Xiao-Feng Wang; Andrew J Buckler; Hyun J Grace Kim; Huiman X Barnhart; Edward F Jackson; Maryellen L Giger; Gene Pennello; Alicia Y Toledano; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Tatiyana V Apanasovich; Paul E Kinahan; Kyle J Myers; Dmitry B Goldgof; Daniel P Barboriak; Robert J Gillies; Lawrence H Schwartz; Daniel C Sullivan
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 3.021

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.