You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither SPIE nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the SPIE website.
31 March 2007Visualization of CAD results to the radiologist: Influence of the marker type on radiologist's sensitivity for the detection of pulmonary nodules
Purpose: The efficiency of the detection of pulmonary nodules by a radiologist with the help of CAD is influenced
by the user interface of the system. Marker with a visually dominant appearance may distract the radiologist from
other parts of the screen. Purpose was to analyse the influence of different CAD markers on radiologist's
performance.
Materials and methods: 10 radiologists analysed 150 pictures of chest CT slices. Every picture contained a CAD
marker; five different types of markers were used - each respectively on 30 pictures (1: thick walled square, 2: thin
walled circle, 3: small arrow, 4: pixel sized point on nodule, 5: very subtle change of colour). One hundred images
contained one nodule: CAD markers marked this finding in 50 cases; in 50 cases a false positive finding was marked
instead. The remaining 50 images contained no nodule but a marker of a false positive finding. The radiologists had
to decide for each image if there was a nodule visible and either click on the nodule or on a button "no finding".
Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each marker type.
Results: Mean sensitivity was 59%, 62%, 64%, 65% and 64% for marker 1 to 5, respectively. Specificity was 50%,
51%, 64%, 45% and 67%. In the cases with false positive findings sensitivity for detection of the unmarked nodule
was 41%, 58%, 59%, 49% and 54%.
New work to be presented: The study shows that the marker type influences radiologist's sensitivity and distraction
from other findings.
Conclusion: Of the tested markers a small arrow was most efficient for the presentation of the results to the
radiologist.
The alert did not successfully save. Please try again later.
Florian Beyer, Stefan Diederich, Walter Heindel, Dag Wormanns, "Visualization of CAD results to the radiologist: Influence of the marker type on radiologist's sensitivity for the detection of pulmonary nodules," Proc. SPIE 6514, Medical Imaging 2007: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 651426 (31 March 2007); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.708897