Mixture Distribution and Receiver Operating Characteristic Analysis of Bedside Chest Imaging with Screen-Film and Computed Radiography

Academic Radiology

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 1-7

  Kundel, Harold L ^a,c   Polansky, Marcia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bedside chest radiography; Computed radiography; Mixture distribution analysis; Receiver operating characteristic analysis; Technology evaluation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; METHODOLOGY; ROC CURVE; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; INTENSIVE CARE UNITS; POINT-OF-CARE SYSTEMS; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; ROC CURVE; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0030639630     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1076-6332(97)80152-3     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Swets JA, Pickett RM. Evaluation of diagnostic systems: methods from signal detection theory. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1982;15-45.
2. Metz CE. Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiographic ROC studies. Invest Radiol 1989;24:235-245.
3. Begg CB, Greenes RA, Iglewicz B. The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests. J Chron Dis 1986;39:575-584.
4. Revesz G, Kundel HL, Bonitatibus M. The effect of verification on the assessment of imaging techniques. Invest Radiol 1982;18:194-198.
5. Titterington DM, Smith AFM, Makov UE. Statistical analysis of finite mixture distributions. New York, NY: Wiley, 1985.
6. Uebersax JS. Statistical modeling of expert ratings on medical treatment appropriateness. J Am Stat Assn 1993;88:421-427.
7. Espeland MA, Handelman SL. Using latent class models to characterize and assess relative error in discrete measurements. Biometrics 1989;45:587-599.
8. Agresti A, Lang JB. Quasi-symmetric latent class models with applications to rater agreement. Biometrics 1993;49:131-139.
9. Kundel H, Wells D, Gefter W, Aronchik J, Miller WS, Miller WJ. Accuracy and agreement of readings on portable chest radiographs made in a medical intensive care unit: a comparison of conventional film and digital radiography. In: Lemke H, Inamura K, Jaffee C, Vannier M, eds. Computer-assisted radiology. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag, 1995;89-94.
10. Kundel HL, Seshadri SB, Langlotz CP, et al. A prospective study of a PACS: information flow and clinical action in a medical intensive care unit. Radiology 1996;199:143-149.
11. Dempster A, Laird N, Rubin D. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J Royal Stat Soc 1977;B39:1-38.
12. Efron B. Better bootstrap confidence intervals. J Am Stat Assn 1987; 82:171-200.
13. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29-36.
14. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. Detection theory: a user's guide. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991;121-124.
15. Henkelman RM, Kay I, Bronskill MJ. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis without truth. Med Decis Making 1990;10:24-29.
16. Begg CB, Metz CE. Consensus diagnoses and "gold standards." Med Decis Making 1990;10:29-30.
17. Greenes RA, Begg CB. Assessment of diagnostic technologies: methodology for unbiased estimation from samples of selectively verified patients. Invest Radiol 1985;20:751-756.
18. Slasky BS, Gur D, Good WF, et al. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser printed, and high-resolution workstation images. Radiology 1990;174:775-780.
19. Wilson AJ, Mann FA, Murphy WA Jr, Monsees BS, Linn MR. Photostimulable phosphor digital radiography of the extremities: diagnostic accuracy compared with conventional radiography. AJR 1991; 157:533-538.