A contaminated binormal model for ROC data. Part III. Initial evaluation with detection ROC data

Academic Radiology

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 438-447

  Dorfman, Donald D ^a,b   Berbaum, Kevin S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b University of Iowa   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision theory; Diagnostic radiology; Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC)

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; THEORY;

EID: 0034119458     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1076-6332(00)80384-0     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS. A contaminated binormal model for ROC data. II. A formal model. Acad Radiol 2000; 7:427-437.
2. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Brandser EA. A contaminated binormal model for ROC data. I. Some interesting examples of binormal degeneracy. Acad Radiol 2000; 7:420-426.
3. Brandser EA, Berbaum KS, Dorfman DD, et al. Evaluation of ankle fractures: two-view versus three-view radiographic series and comparison of two-view combinations. AJR (in press).
4. Clark CR, Bonfiglio M. Orthopaedics: essentials of diagnosis and treatment. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone, 1994; 117.
5. Green DM, Swets JA. Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York, NY: Wiley, 1966; 103-106.
6. Dorfman DD, Alf E Jr. Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory and determination of confidence intervals: rating method data. J Math Psychol 1969; 6:487-496.
7. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS. Degeneracy and discrete ROC rating data. Acad Radiol 1995; 2:907-915.
8. Pan X, Metz CE. The "proper" binormal model: parametric receiver operating characteristic curve estimation with degenerate data. Acad Radiol 1997; 4:380-389.
9. Metz CE, Pan X. Proper binormal ROC curves: theory and maximum-likelihood estimation. J Math Psychol 1999; 43:1-33.
10. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE, Lenth RV, Hanley JA, Abu-Dagga H. Proper receiver operating characteristic analysis: the bigamma model. Acad Radiol 1997; 4:138-149.
11. Swensson RG. Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. Med Phys 1996; 23:1709-1725.
12. McNeil BJ, Hanley JA. Statistical approaches to the analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Med Decis Making 1984; 4:137-150.
13. Hohle RH. Detection of a visual signal with low background noise: an experimental comparison of two theories. J Exp Psychol 1965; 70:459-463.
14. Swets JA, Tanner WP Jr, Birdsall TG. The evidence for a decision-making theory of visual detection. Electronic Defense Group Technical Report No. 40. Ann Arbor, Mich: University of Michigan, 1955.
15. Swets JA. Forms of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: implications for theory and measurement of performance. Psych Bull 1986; 99:181-198.
16. Swets JA, Pickett RM, Whitehead SF, et al. Assessment of diagnostic technologies. Science 1979; 205:753-759.
17. Swets JA, Pickett RM. Evaluation of diagnostic systems: methods from signal detection theory. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1982.
18. Franken EA Jr, Berbaum KS, Marley SM, Smith WL, Sato Y. Evaluation of a PACS workstation for interpreting of neonatal examinations: an ROC study. Invest Radiol 1992; 27:732-737.
19. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jacknife method. Invest Radiol 1992; 27:723-731.
20. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV. Multi-reader multi-case ROC methodology: a bootstrap analysis. Acad Radiol 1995; 2:626-633.
21. Toledano A, Gatsonis C. Regression analysis of correlated ROC curves. Acad Radiol 1995; 2(suppl 1):S30-S36.
22. Chan H-P, Sahiner B, Helvie MA, et al. Improvement of radiologist's characterization of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC study. Radiology 1999; 212:817-827.