Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 9 , Pages 1095-1107, September 2009

Investigation of Reading Mode and Relative Sensitivity as Factors That Influence Reader Performance When Using Computer-Aided Detection Software

Center for Devices and Radiological Health/National Insitute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Joint Laboratory for the Assessment of Medical Imaging Systems, US Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Building 62, Room 3110, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002

Received 17 November 2008; accepted 24 March 2009. published online 15 June 2009.

Rationale and Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of relative sensitivity (reader without computer-aided detection [CAD] vs stand-alone CAD) and reading mode on reader performance when using CAD software.

Materials and Methods

Two sets of 100 images (low-contrast and high-contrast sets) were created by adding low-contrast or high-contrast simulated masses to random locations in 100 normal mammograms. This produced a relative sensitivity, substantially less for the low-contrast set and similar for the high-contrast set. Seven readers reviewed every image in each set and specified location and probability scores using three reading modes (without CAD, second read with CAD, and concurrent read with CAD). Reader detection accuracy was analyzed using areas under free-response receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivity, and the number of false-positive findings per image.

Results

For the low-contrast set, average differences in areas under free-response receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivity, and false-positive findings per image without CAD were 0.02, 0.12, and 0.11, respectively, compared to second read and 0.05, 0.17, and 0.09 (not statistically significant), respectively, compared to concurrent read. For the high-contrast set, average differences were 0.002 (not statistically significant), 0.04, and 0.05, respectively, compared to second read and −0.004 (not statistically significant), 0.04, and 0.08 (not statistically significant), respectively, compared to concurrent read (all differences were statistically significant except as noted). Differences were greater in the low-contrast set than the high-contrast set. Differences between second read and concurrent read were not significant.

Conclusions

Relative sensitivity is a critical factor that determines incremental improvement in reader performance when using CAD and appears to be more important than reading mode. Relative sensitivity may determine the clinical usefulness of CAD in different clinical applications and for different types of users.

Key Words: Observer study evaluation, computer-aided detection, reading mode, relative sensitivity, free-response receiver operating characteristic

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 The Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Blomedical Imaging and Bloenglneering (Bethesda, MD) provided Partlal support for this work.

PII: S1076-6332(09)00265-7

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2009.03.024

Academic Radiology
Volume 16, Issue 9 , Pages 1095-1107, September 2009