Literature DB >> 3095258

ROC methodology in radiologic imaging.

C E Metz.   

Abstract

If the performance of a diagnostic imaging system is to be evaluated objectively and meaningfully, one must compare radiologists' image-based diagnoses with actual states of disease and health in a way that distinguishes between the inherent diagnostic capacity of the radiologists' interpretations of the images, and any tendencies to "under-read" or "over-read". ROC methodology provides the only known basis for distinguishing between these two aspects of diagnostic performance. After identifying the fundamental issues that motivate ROC analysis, this article develops ROC concepts in an intuitive way. The requirements of a valid ROC study and practical techniques for ROC data collection and data analysis are sketched briefly. A survey of the radiologic literature indicates the broad variety of evaluation studies in which ROC analysis has been employed.

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3095258     DOI: 10.1097/00004424-198609000-00009

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


  245 in total

1.  Low-cost soft-copy display accuracy in the detection of pulmonary nodules by single-exposure dual-energy subtraction: comparison with hard-copy viewing.

Authors:  S Kido; K Kuriyama; N Hosomi; E Inoue; C Kuroda; T Horai
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of film-based, TIFF, and wavelet compressed digital temporomandibular joint images.

Authors:  C J Trapnell; W C Scarfe; J H Cook; A M Silvejra; F J Regennitter; B S Haskell
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Feature selection and classifier performance in computer-aided diagnosis: the effect of finite sample size.

Authors:  B Sahiner; H P Chan; N Petrick; R F Wagner; L Hadjiiski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Diagnostic value of Tl-201 lung uptake is dependent on measurement method.

Authors:  A Hitzel; A Manrique; A Cribier; P Véra
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  NLM tele-educational application for radiologists to interpret mammography.

Authors:  Min Wu; Yuanshui Zheng; Michael North; Etta Pisano
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2002

6.  Increasing the accuracy of electromagnetic inverses using functional area source correlation constraints.

Authors:  Benoit R Cottereau; Justin M Ales; Anthony M Norcia
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography.

Authors:  Patrik Sund; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-10-16       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  An alternate method for using a visual discrimination model (VDM) to optimize soft-copy display image quality.

Authors:  Dev P Chakraborty
Journal:  J Soc Inf Disp       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.140

9.  Reliable and computationally efficient maximum-likelihood estimation of "proper" binormal ROC curves.

Authors:  Lorenzo L Pesce; Charles E Metz
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Reference database of biochemical markers of bone turnover for the Japanese female population. Japanese Population-based Osteoporosis (JPOS) Study.

Authors:  Masayuki Iki; Takashi Akiba; Toshio Matsumoto; Harumi Nishino; Sadanobu Kagamimori; Yoshiko Kagawa; Hideo Yoneshima
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-07-31       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.