ArticleMedical physics2012
A computerized scheme for lung nodule detection in multiprojection chest radiography.
Article in Medical physics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOur previous study indicated that multiprojection chest radiography could significantly improve radiologists' performance for lung nodule detection in clinical practice. In this study, the authors further verify that multiprojection chest radiography can greatly improve the performance of a computer-aided diagnostic (CAD) scheme.
methodsOur database consisted of 59 subjects, including 43 subjects with 45 nodules and 16 subjects without nodules. The 45 nodules included 7 real and 38 simulated ones. The authors developed a conventional CAD scheme and a new fusion CAD scheme to detect lung nodules. The conventional CAD scheme consisted of four steps for (1) identification of initial nodule candidates inside lungs, (2) nodule candidate segmentation based on dynamic programming, (3) extraction of 33 features from nodule candidates, and (4) false positive reduction using a piecewise linear classifier. The conventional CAD scheme processed each of the three projection images of a subject independently and discarded the correlation information between the three images. The fusion CAD scheme included the four steps in the conventional CAD scheme and two additional steps for (5) registration of all candidates in the three images of a subject, and (6) integration of correlation information between the registered candidates in the three images. The integration step retained all candidates detected at least twice in the three images of a subject and removed those detected only once in the three images as false positives. A leave-one-subject-out testing method was used for evaluation of the performance levels of the two CAD schemes.
resultsAt the sensitivities of 70%, 65%, and 60%, our conventional CAD scheme reported 14.7, 11.3, and 8.6 false positives per image, respectively, whereas our fusion CAD scheme reported 3.9, 1.9, and 1.2 false positives per image, and 5.5, 2.8, and 1.7 false positives per patient, respectively. The low performance of the conventional CAD scheme may be attributed to the high noise level in chest radiography, and the small size and low contrast of most nodules.
conclusionsThis study indicated that the fusion of correlation information in multiprojection chest radiography can markedly improve the performance of CAD scheme for lung nodule detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.