AJR ARRS Membership
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zheng, B.
Right arrow Articles by Gur, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zheng, B.
Right arrow Articles by Gur, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
AJR 2004; 182:579-583
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Computer-Aided Detection Schemes: The Effect of Limiting the Number of Cued Regions in Each Case

Bin Zheng1, Joseph K. Leader, Gordon Abrams, Betty Shindel, Victor Catullo, Walter F. Good and David Gur

1 All authors: Department of Radiology, Imaging Research, Magee-Women's Hospital, University of Pittsburgh, 300 Halket St., Ste. 4200, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3180.

OBJECTIVE. We assessed performance changes of a mammographic computer-aided detection scheme when we restricted the maximum number of regions that could be identified (cued) as showing positive findings in each case.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. A computer-aided detection scheme was applied to 500 cases (or 2,000 images), including 300 cases in which mammograms showed verified malignant masses. We evaluated the overall case-based performance of the scheme using a free-response receiver operating characteristic approach, and we measured detection sensitivity at a fixed false-positive detection rate of 0.4 per image after gradually reducing the maximum number of cued regions allowed for each case from seven to one.

RESULTS. The original computer-aided detection scheme achieved a maximum case-based sensitivity of 97% at 3.3 false-positive detected regions per image. For a detection decision score set at 0.565, the scheme had a 79% (237/300) case-based sensitivity, with 0.4 false-positive detected regions per image. After limiting the number of maximum allowed cued regions per case, the false-positive rates decreased faster than the true-positive rates. At a maximum of two cued regions per case, the false-positive rate decreased from 0.4 to 0.21 per image, whereas detection sensitivity decreased from 237 to 220 masses. To maintain sensitivity at 79%, we reduced the detection decision score to as low as 0.36, which resulted in a reduction of false-positive detected regions from 0.4 to 0.3 per image and a reduction in region-based sensitivity from 66.1% to 61.4%.

CONCLUSION. Limiting the maximum number of cued regions per case can improve the overall case-based performance of computer-aided detection schemes in mammography.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. A. Baker, E. L. Rosen, M. M. Crockett, and J. Y. Lo
Accuracy of Segmentation of a Commercial Computer-aided Detection System for Mammography
Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 385 - 390.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
N. A. Obuchowski
ROC Analysis
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2005; 184(2): 364 - 372.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
D. Gur, J. S. Stalder, L. A. Hardesty, B. Zheng, J. H. Sumkin, D. M. Chough, B. E. Shindel, and H. E. Rockette
Computer-aided Detection Performance in Mammographic Examination of Masses: Assessment
Radiology, November 1, 2004; 233(2): 418 - 423.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.