Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27114353›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2016

Inter-observer Variability Analysis of Automatic Lung Delineation in Normal and Disease Patients.

Luca Saba, Joel C M Than, Norliza M Noor, Omar M Rijal, Rosminah M Kassim, Ashari Yunus, Chue R Ng, Jasjit S Suri

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. COVLIAS 1.0Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Luca SabaAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria (A.O.U.) di Cagliari - Polo di Monserrato, Università di Cagliari, s.s. 554 Monserrato, Cagliari, 09045, Italy.
Joel C M ThanUTM Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Norliza M NoorDepartment of Engineering, UTM Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Omar M RijalInstitute of Mathematical Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Rosminah M KassimDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Kuala Lumpur Hospital, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Ashari YunusInstitute of Respiratory Medicine, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Chue R NgUTM Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Jasjit S SuriGlobal Biomedical Technologies, Inc., Roseville, CA, USA. jasjit.suri@atheropoint.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human interaction has become almost mandatory for an automated medical system wishing to be accepted by clinical regulatory agencies such as Food and Drug Administration. Since this interaction causes variability in the gathered data, the inter-observer and intra-observer variability must be analyzed in order to validate the accuracy of the system. This study focuses on the variability from different observers that interact with an automated lung delineation system that relies on human interaction in the form of delineation of the lung borders. The database consists of High Resolution Computed Tomography (HRCT): 15 normal and 81 diseased patients' images taken retrospectively at five levels per patient. Three observers manually delineated the lungs borders independently and using software called ImgTracer™ (AtheroPoint™, Roseville, CA, USA) to delineate the lung boundaries in all five levels of 3-D lung volume. The three observers consisted of Observer-1: lesser experienced novice tracer who is a resident in radiology under the guidance of radiologist, whereas Observer-2 and Observer-3 are lung image scientists trained by lung radiologist and biomedical imaging scientist and experts. The inter-observer variability can be shown by comparing each observer's tracings to the automated delineation and also by comparing each manual tracing of the observers with one another. The normality of the tracings was tested using D'Agostino-Pearson test and all observers tracings showed a normal P-value higher than 0.05. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) test between three observers and automated showed a P-value higher than 0.89 and 0.81 for the right lung (RL) and left lung (LL), respectively. The performance of the automated system was evaluated using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Jaccard Index (JI) and Hausdorff (HD) Distance measures. Although, Observer-1 has lesser experience compared to Obsever-2 and Obsever-3, the Observer Deterioration Factor (ODF) shows that Observer-1 has less than 10% difference compared to the other two, which is under acceptable range as per our analysis. To compare between observers, this study used regression plots, Bland-Altman plots, two tailed T-test, Mann-Whiney, Chi-Squared tests which showed the following P-values for RL and LL: (i) Observer-1 and Observer-3 were: 0.55, 0.48, 0.29 for RL and 0.55, 0.59, 0.29 for LL; (ii) Observer-1 and Observer-2 were: 0.57, 0.50, 0.29 for RL and 0.54, 0.59, 0.29 for LL; (iii) Observer-2 and Observer-3 were: 0.98, 0.99, 0.29 for RL and 0.99, 0.99, 0.29 for LL. Further, CC and R-squared coefficients were computed between observers which came out to be 0.9 for RL and LL. All three observers however manage to show the feature that diseased lungs are smaller than normal lungs in terms of area.

Indexed as

Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedObserver VariationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedTomography, X-Ray ComputedUnited StatesYoung AdultInter-observerLung, CT, Automated delineationManual delineationReliabilityStabilityStatistical testsVariability

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.