Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39593823›Full record

ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024

A Comprehensive Review of Performance Metrics for Computer-Aided Detection Systems.

Doohyun Park

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Doohyun ParkVUNO Inc., Seoul 06541, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6237-468X

Funding

Ministry of Health and Welfare HI22C041600
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper aims to provide a structured analysis of the performance metrics used in computer-aided detection (CAD) systems, specifically focusing on lung nodule detection in computed tomography (CT) images. By examining key metrics along with their respective strengths and limitations, this study offers guidelines to assist in selecting appropriate metrics. Evaluation methods for CAD systems for lung nodule detection are primarily categorized into per-scan and per-nodule approaches. For per-scan analysis, a key metric is the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUROC), which evaluates the ability of the system to distinguish between scans with and without nodules. For per-nodule analysis, the nodule-level sensitivity at fixed false positives per scan is often used, supplemented by the free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) curve and the competition performance metric (CPM). However, the CPM does not provide normalized scores because it theoretically ranges from zero to infinity and largely varies depending on the characteristics of the data. To address the advantages and limitations of ROC and FROC curves, an alternative FROC (AFROC) was introduced to combine the strengths of both per-scan and per-nodule analyses. This paper discusses the principles of each metric and their relative strengths, providing insights into their clinical implications and practical utility.

Indexed as

alternative free-response receiver operating characteristicartificial intelligencecomputer-aided detectionfree-response receiver operating characteristiclung noduleperformance metricreceiver operating characteristic

Identifiers

PMID39593823
PMCPMC11592234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.