Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 5 , Pages 638-640 , May 2009

Imaging Technology and Practice Assessments: What Next?

  • David Gur, ScD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: D.G.

Received 11 November 2008 ,Accepted 22 November 2008.

References 

  1. Gur D, Bandos AI, Cohen CS, et al. The “laboratory” effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations. Radiology. 2008;249:47–53
  2. Gur D, Bandos AI, King JL, et al. Binary and multi-category ratings in a laboratory observer. performance study: a comparison. Med Phys. 2008;35:4404–4409
  3. Gur D, Bandos AI, Klym AH, et al. Agreement of the order of overall performance levels under different reading paradigms. Acad Radiol. 2008;15:1567–1573
  4. The EC/IC Bypass Study Group. Failure of extracranial-intracranial arterial bypass to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke. Results of an international randomized trial. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:1191–1200
  5. Hillman BJ. Economic, legal, and ethical rationales for the ACRIN National Lung Screening Trial of CT screening for lung cancer. Acad Radiol. 2003;10:349–350
  6. Church TR National Lung Screening Trial Executive Committee. Chest radiography as the comparison for spiral CT in the National Lung Screening Trial. Acad Radiol. 2003;10:713–715
  7. Pisano ED, Gatsonis CA, Yaffe MJ, et al. American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology. Radiology. 2005;236:404–412
  8. Gur D. Retrospective analyses of pivotal prospective studies with population segmentation—statistically based inferences and clinical relevance. Acad Radiol. 2008;15:1458–1462
  9. Gur D, Sumkin JH, Rockette HE, et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:185–190
  10. Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1399–1409

 This work is supported in part by grant EB003503 (to the University of Pittsburgh) from the National Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

PII: S1076-6332(08)00750-2

doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2008.11.013

Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 5 , Pages 638-640 , May 2009

Article Tools