Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 1996
ROC-analysis of detection performance by analogue and digital plain film systems in chest radiography.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Müller R D, Wähling S, Hirche H, Voss M, Blendl C, Gocke C, Gocke P, Buddenbrock B, John V, Wiebringhaus R, Turowski B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the performances of 4 imaging systems in the diagnostic radiology of the chest: an asymmetric screen-film combination (a-SFC); a conventional screen-film combination of speed class 200 (SFC); a screen-film combination of speed class 200 with an aluminium lung filter; and digital luminescence radiographs (DLR).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Object detectability studies were carried out using an anthropomorphic chest phantom. The images were obtained under standard exposure conditions at 125 kVp. The detection performance of the various systems was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis on the basis of a total of 12,240 observations.
RESULTS: In the overall evaluation the a-SFC and the SFC plus lung filter received equally high ratings of 0.878+/-0.018 and 0.860+/-0.21, respectively (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the 200-speed SFC and the storage phosphor radiographs. In the mediastinum all the tested systems were clearly superior to the 200-speed SFC (p<0.05) while in the lung fields the 200-speed SFC received a high rating of 0.866+/-0.026. The a-SFC had slight advantages over the SFC plus lung filter and the 2 digital imaging modes (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION: The a-SFC and the digital luminescence radiographs provide a significant gain in diagnostic information in the mediastinum without diminishing detail detectability in the lung fields and without additional radiation exposure.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Object detectability studies were carried out using an anthropomorphic chest phantom. The images were obtained under standard exposure conditions at 125 kVp. The detection performance of the various systems was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis on the basis of a total of 12,240 observations.
RESULTS: In the overall evaluation the a-SFC and the SFC plus lung filter received equally high ratings of 0.878+/-0.018 and 0.860+/-0.21, respectively (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the 200-speed SFC and the storage phosphor radiographs. In the mediastinum all the tested systems were clearly superior to the 200-speed SFC (p<0.05) while in the lung fields the 200-speed SFC received a high rating of 0.866+/-0.026. The a-SFC had slight advantages over the SFC plus lung filter and the 2 digital imaging modes (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION: The a-SFC and the digital luminescence radiographs provide a significant gain in diagnostic information in the mediastinum without diminishing detail detectability in the lung fields and without additional radiation exposure.