The Reproducibility of Changes in Diagnostic Figures of Merit Across Laboratory and Clinical Imaging Reader Studies.

Rationale and Objectives: In this paper we examine which comparisons of reading performance between diagnostic imaging systems made in controlled retrospective laboratory studies may be representative of what we observe in later clinical studies. The change in a meaningful diagnostic figure of merit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Academic Radiology Vol. 24; no. 11; pp. 1436 - 1447
Autores principales: Samuelson, Frank W., Abbey, Craig K.
Formato: research Journal Article
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. Nov2017
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=125788185&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 125788185
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10766332
        T4X
      jtl: Academic Radiology
      issn: 10766332
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Nov2017
      vid: 24
      iid: 11
      pid: 467
      pub: Elsevier B.V.
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        125788185
        125788185
        NLM28666723
        125788185
        10.1016/j.acra.2017.05.007
        NLM28666723
        125788185
      ppf: 1436
      ppct: 11
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: The Reproducibility of Changes in Diagnostic Figures of Merit Across Laboratory and Clinical Imaging Reader Studies.
      aug:
        au:
          Samuelson, Frank W.
          Abbey, Craig K.
        affil: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 62, Room 3102, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
      sug:
        subj:
          Ultrasonography
          Mammography Methods
          Breast
          Breast Neoplasms
          Female
          ROC Curve
          Reproducibility of Results
          Pharmacokinetics
          Human
          Validation Studies
          Comparative Studies
          Evaluation Research
          Multicenter Studies
          Funding Source
          Female
      ab: Rationale and Objectives: In this paper we examine which comparisons of reading performance between diagnostic imaging systems made in controlled retrospective laboratory studies may be representative of what we observe in later clinical studies. The change in a meaningful diagnostic figure of merit between two diagnostic modalities should be qualitatively or quantitatively comparable across all kinds of studies.Materials and Methods: In this meta-study we examine the reproducibility of relative measures of sensitivity, false positive fraction (FPF), area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and expected utility across laboratory and observational clinical studies for several different breast imaging modalities, including screen film mammography, digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and ultrasound.Results: Across studies of all types, the changes in the FPFs yielded very small probabilities of having a common mean value. The probabilities of relative sensitivity being the same across ultrasound and tomosynthesis studies were low. No evidence was found for different mean values of relative area under the ROC curve or relative expected utility within any of the study sets.Conclusion: The comparison demonstrates that the ratios of areas under the ROC curve and expected utilities are reproducible across laboratory and clinical studies, whereas sensitivity and FPF are not.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N