ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2017
Analog Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) information can be more effective than binary marks.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and computer-aided diagnosis in diagnostic decisions: 5 questions for medical informatics and human-computer interface research.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Review
- The message matters: changes to binary Computer Aided Detection recommendations affect cancer detection in low prevalence search.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Effects of machine learning errors on human decision-making: manipulations of model accuracy, error types, and error importance.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In socially important visual search tasks, such as baggage screening and diagnostic radiology, experts miss more targets than is desirable. Computer-aided detection (CAD) programs have been developed specifically to improve performance in these professional search tasks. For example, in breast cancer screening, many CAD systems are capable of detecting approximately 90% of breast cancer, with approximately 0.5 false-positive detections per image. Nevertheless, benefits of CAD in clinical settings tend to be small (Birdwell, 2009) or even absent (Meziane et al., 2011; Philpotts, 2009). The marks made by a CAD system can be "binary," giving the same signal to any location where the signal is above some threshold. Alternatively, a CAD system presents an analog signal that reflects strength of the signal at a location. In the experiments reported, we compare analog and binary CAD presentations using nonexpert observers and artificial stimuli defined by two noisy signals: a visible color signal and an "invisible" signal that informed our simulated CAD system. We found that analog CAD generally yielded better overall performance than binary CAD. The analog benefit is similar at high and low target prevalence. Our data suggest that the form of the CAD signal can directly influence performance. Analog CAD may allow the computer to be more helpful to the searcher.
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.