Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Assessment of Intraaxial and Extraaxial Brain Lesions with Digitized Computed Tomographic Images versus Film: ROC Analysis

  • Suzie M. El-Saden
  • , George J. Hademenos
  • , Wei Zhu
  • , James W. Sayre
  • , Brad Glenn
  • , Jim Steidler
  • , Lakshmi Kode
  • , Brian King
  • , Diana Quinones
  • , Daniel J. Valentino
  • , John R. Bentson
  • University of California at Los Angeles

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Rationale and Objectives. The authors evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of viewing computed tomographic (CT) scans as film versus soft-copy images at a workstation. Methods. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of the interpretation of 202 CT scans (103 were normal, 99 were abnormal) by five neuroradiologists was performed. Abnormal images contained high- or low-attenuation intraaxial lesions or extraaxial fluid (subdural, subarachnoid, or epidural hemorrhage) Hard copies were read on a standard light box, and digital images were examined at a 1,024× 1,250 workstation. Lesion location and type and confidence ratings were recorded on a worksheet. Results. There were no statistically significant differences in diagnostic accuracy between the two display modes. Reader performance was slightly better with the workstation in the assessment of low-attenuation lesions. Conclusion. Diagnostic accuracy is similar for CT scans displayed at a workstation and those displayed as hard copy in the assessment of subtle intra- and extraaxial brain lesions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)90-95
Number of pages6
JournalAcademic Radiology
Volume4
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1997

Keywords

  • Brain, CT
  • Images, display
  • Images, interpretation
  • Picture archiving and communication system (PACS)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of Intraaxial and Extraaxial Brain Lesions with Digitized Computed Tomographic Images versus Film: ROC Analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this