Components-of-variance models for random-effects ROC analysis: The case of unequal variance structures across modalities

Academic Radiology

Volumn 8, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 605-615

  Beiden, Sergey V ^a   Wagner, Robert F ^a   Campbell, Gregory ^a   Metz, Charles E ^b   Jiang, Yulei ^b  

^a CENTER FOR DEVICES AND RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Bootstrap; Components of variance; Jackknife; Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; CALCIFICATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; HUMAN; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS; VARIANCE;

EID: 0034962147     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80685-2     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method
2. Advances in statistical methods for diagnostic radiology: A symposium
3. Components-of-variance models and multiple-bootstrap experiments: An alternative methodology for random-effects ROC analysis
4. Variance-component modeling in the analysis of receiver operating characteristic index estimates
5. Improving breast cancer diagnosis with computer-aided diagnosis
6. Analysis of uncertainties in estimates of components of variance in multivariate ROC analysis
7. Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: Split plot experimental design
8. Implications of a "noisy" observer to data processing techniques
9. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach
10. Nonparametric comparison of two tests of cardiac function on the same patient population using the entire ROC curve
11. The potential of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) to reduce variability in radiologists' interpretation of mammograms
12. Toward consensus on quantitative assessment of medical imaging systems
13. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists