Translator Disclaimer
20 March 2015 Potential reasons for differences in CAD effectiveness evaluated using laboratory and clinical studies
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Research studies have investigated a number of factors that may impact the performance assessment of computer aided detection (CAD) effectiveness, such as the inherent design of the CAD, the image and reader samples, and the assessment methods. In this study, we focused on the effect of prevalence on cue validity (co-occurrence of cue and signal) and learning as potentially important factors in CAD assessment. For example, the prevalence of cases with breast cancer is around 50% in laboratory CAD studies, which is 100 times higher than that in breast cancer screening. Although ROC is prevalence-independent, an observer’s use of CAD involves tasks that are more complicated than binary classification, including: search, detection, classification, cueing and learning. We developed models to investigate the potential impact of prevalence on cue validity and the learning of cue validity tasks. We hope this work motivates new studies that investigate previously under-explored factors involved in image interpretation with a new modality in its assessment.
© (2015) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Xin He, Frank Samuelson, Rongping Zeng, and Berkman Sahiner "Potential reasons for differences in CAD effectiveness evaluated using laboratory and clinical studies", Proc. SPIE 9414, Medical Imaging 2015: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 94141V (20 March 2015); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2082811
PROCEEDINGS
11 PAGES


SHARE
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back to Top