Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28299236›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical imaging science2017

Computer-aided Detection Fidelity of Pulmonary Nodules in Chest Radiograph.

Nikolaos Dellios, Ulf Teichgraeber, Robert Chelaru, Ansgar Malich, Ismini E Papageorgiou

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical imaging science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nikolaos DelliosDepartment of Experimental Radiology, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany; Institute of Radiology, Suedharz Hospital Nordhausen gGmbH, Nordhausen, Germany.
Ulf TeichgraeberDepartment of Experimental Radiology, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Robert ChelaruInstitute of Radiology, Suedharz Hospital Nordhausen gGmbH, Nordhausen, Germany.
Ansgar MalichInstitute of Radiology, Suedharz Hospital Nordhausen gGmbH, Nordhausen, Germany.
Ismini E PapageorgiouInstitute of Radiology, Suedharz Hospital Nordhausen gGmbH, Nordhausen, Germany.
Südharz Klinikum · DEFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEJena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe most ubiquitous chest diagnostic method is the chest radiograph. A common radiographic finding, quite often incidental, is the nodular pulmonary lesion. The detection of small lesions out of complex parenchymal structure is a daily clinical challenge. In this study, we investigate the efficacy of the computer-aided detection (CAD) software package SoftView™ 2.4A for bone suppression and OnGuard™ 5.2 (Riverain Technologies, Miamisburg, OH, USA) for automated detection of pulmonary nodules in chest radiographs. SUBJECTS AND

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated a dataset of 100 posteroanterior chest radiographs with pulmonary nodular lesions ranging from 5 to 85 mm. All nodules were confirmed with a consecutive computed tomography scan and histologically classified as 75% malignant. The number of detected lesions by observation in unprocessed images was compared to the number and dignity of CAD-detected lesions in bone-suppressed images (BSIs).

resultsSoftView™ BSI does not affect the objective lesion-to-background contrast. OnGuard™ has a stand-alone sensitivity of 62% and specificity of 58% for nodular lesion detection in chest radiographs. The false positive rate is 0.88/image and the false negative (FN) rate is 0.35/image. From the true positive lesions, 20% were proven benign and 80% were malignant. FN lesions were 47% benign and 53% malignant.

conclusionWe conclude that CAD does not qualify for a stand-alone standard of diagnosis. The use of CAD accompanied with a critical radiological assessment of the software suggested pattern appears more realistic. Accordingly, it is essential to focus on studies assessing the quality-time-cost profile of real-time (as opposed to retrospective) CAD implementation in clinical diagnostics.

Indexed as

Bone suppression imagingchest radiographcomputer-aided detectionlung cancerpulmonary nodule

Identifiers

PMID28299236
PMCPMC5341301
OpenAlexW2592684986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.