Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,642

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging

METZ, CHARLES E.·1986·Investigative Radiology

Abstract

If the performance of a diagnostic imaging system is to be evaluated objectively and meaningfully, one must compare radiologists' image-based diagnoses with actual states of disease and health in a way that distinguishes between the inherent diagnostic capacity of the radiologists' interpretations of the images, and any tendencies to "under-read" or "over-read". ROC methodology provides the only known basis for distinguishing between these two aspects of diagnostic performance. After identifying the fundamental issues that motivate ROC analysis, this article develops ROC concepts in an intuitive way. The requirements of a valid ROC study and practical techniques for ROC data collection and data analysis are sketched briefly. A survey of the radiologic literature indicates the broad variety of evaluation studies in which ROC analysis has been employed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00004424-198609000-00009

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,642

Metadata

Authors
METZ, C. E.
Venue
Investigative Radiology
Published
1986-09
Volume
21
Issue
9
Pages
720-733
ISSN
0020-9996 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035950812
Cited by
1,642
References
0
FWCI
15.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00004424-198609000-00009
The paper
METZ, C. E. (1986). ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging. Investigative Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004424-198609000-00009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.