Improved classifications of planar whole-body bone scans using a computer-assisted diagnosis system: A multicenter, multiple-reader, multiple-case study

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 368-375

  Sadik, May ^a,e   Suurkula, Madis ^a   Höglund, Peter ^b   Jamnd, Andreas ^c   Edenbrandt, Lars ^a,c,d  

^a SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c EXINI Diagnostics AB   (Sweden)

^d LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^e UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bone metastases; Breast cancer; Diagnostic accuracy; Prostate cancer; Radionuclide imaging

Indexed keywords

MEDRONATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NORMAL HUMAN; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WHOLE BODY SCINTISCANNING;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TECHNETIUM TC 99M MEDRONATE; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 62449243949     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.058883     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Doi K. Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: historical review, current status and future potential. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2007:31:198-211.
2. Gromet M. Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231, 221 mammograms. AJR. 2008;190:854-859.
3. Goldin JG, Brown MS, Petkovska I. Computer-aided diagnosis in lung nodule assessment. J Thorac Imaging. 2008:23:97-104.
4. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systemic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ. 2005;330:765-768.
5. Sadik M, Suurkula M, Hoglund P, Järund A, Edenbrandt L. Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations: a nationwide survey. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1464-1472.
6. Sadik M, Hamadeh I, Nordblom P, et al. Computer-assisted diagnosis of planar whole-body bone scans. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1958-1965.
7. Sadik M, Jakobsson D, Olofsson F, Ohlsson M, Suurkula M, Edenbrandt L. A new computer-based decision-support system for the interpretation of bone scans. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:417-423.
8. Svensson E, Holm S. Separation of systematic and random differences in ordinal rating scales. Stat Med. 1994:13:2437-2453.
9. Svensson E. Slarmark JE, Ekholm S, von Essen C, Johansson A. Analysis of interobserver disagreement in the assessment of subarachnoid blood and acute hydrocephalus on CT scans. Neurol Res. 1996:18:487-494.
10. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol. 1992:27:723-731.
11. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV. Chen YF, Donaghy BA. Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: factorial experimental design. Acad Radiol. 1998;5:591-602.
12. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS. Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. Acad Radiol. 2004;11:1260-1273.
13. Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS. A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data. Stat Med. 2005:24:1579-1607.
14. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS. Monte Carlo validation of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method using normalized pseudovalues and less data-based model simplification. A cad Radiol. 2005; 12:1534-1541.
15. Hillis SL. A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods for multiple observer ROC analysis. Stat Med. 2007;26:596-619.
16. Hillis SL. Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Recent developments in the Dorfman-BerbaumMetz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol. 2008; 15:647-661.
17. Lindaht D, Lanke J, Lundin A, Palmer J, Edenbrandt L. Improved classifications of myocardial bull's-eye scintigrams with computer-based decision support system. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:96-101.
18. Tagil K, Bondouy M, Chaborel JP, et al. A decision support system improves the interpretation of myocardial perfusion imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1602-1607.
19. Halligan S, Attman DG, Mallett S, et al. Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection. Gastroenterology. 2006;131:1690-1699.
20. Peters AM, Bomanji J, Costa DC, et at. Clinical audit in nuclear medicine. Nucl Med Commun. 2004;25:97-103.
21. Taylor SA. Greenhalgh R. Ilangovan R, et al. CT colonography and computer-aided detection: effect of false-positive results on reader specificity and reading efficiency in a low-prevalence screening population. Radiology. 2008;247:133-140.