...
首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Radiology >Comparison of standard reading and computer aided detection (CAD) on a national proficiency test of screening mammography.
【24h】

Comparison of standard reading and computer aided detection (CAD) on a national proficiency test of screening mammography.

机译:在筛查乳房X线照相术的国家水平测试中比较标准读数和计算机辅助检测(CAD)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of computer aided detection (CAD) in improving the interpretation of screening mammograms MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten radiologists underwent a proficiency test of screening mammography first by conventional reading and then with the help of CAD. Radiologists were blinded to test results for the whole study duration. Results of conventional and CAD reading were compared in terms of sensitivity and recall rate. Double reading was simulated combining conventional readings of four expert radiologists and compared with CAD reading. RESULTS: Considering all ten readings, cancer was identified in 146 or 153 of 170 cases (85.8 vs. 90.0%; chi(2)=0.99, df=1, P=0.31) and recalls were 106 or 152 of 1330 cases (7.9 vs. 11.4%; chi(2)=8.69, df=1, P=0.003) at conventional or CAD reading, respectively. CAD reading was essentially the same (sensitivity 97.0 vs. 96.0%; chi(2)=7.1, df=1, P=0.93; recall rate 10.7 vs. 10.6%; chi(2)=1.5, df=1, P=0.96) as compared with simulated conventional double reading. CONCLUSION: CAD reading seems to improve the sensitivity of conventional reading while reducing specificity, both effects being of limited size. CAD reading had almost the same performance of simulated conventional double reading, suggesting a possible use of CAD which needs to be confirmed by further studies inclusive of cost-effective analysis.
机译:目的:评估计算机辅助检测(CAD)在改善乳腺X线照片筛查的解释中的作用。材料与方法:十名放射科医生首先通过常规阅读,然后在CAD的帮助下进行了乳腺X线检查的能力测试。放射科医生对整个研究期间的测试结果视而不见。比较常规和CAD读取的结果的敏感性和召回率。结合了四位放射线专家的常规读数,对双重读数进行了模拟,并与CAD读数进行了比较。结果:考虑到所有十个读数,在170例病例中的146例或153例中识别出癌症(85.8比90.0%; chi(2)= 0.99,df = 1,P = 0.31),召回率为1330例中的106例或152例(7.9) vs. 11.4%; chi(2)= 8.69,df = 1,P = 0.003)分别在常规或CAD读数下显示。 CAD读数基本相同(灵敏度97.0 vs.96.0%; chi(2)= 7.1,df = 1,P = 0.93;召回率10.7 vs.10.6%; chi(2)= 1.5,df = 1,P = 0.96),与模拟的传统双读相比。结论:CAD读数似乎可以提高常规读数的灵敏度,同时降低特异性,两种作用的大小均有限。 CAD读取几乎具有与传统的常规双重读取相同的性能,这表明可能使用CAD,这需要通过包括成本效益分析在内的进一步研究加以证实。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号