The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Automated detection of lung nodules in CT scans: Preliminary results
Abstract
We have developed a fully automated computerized method for the detection of lung nodules in helical computed tomography (CT) scans of the thorax. This method is based on two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional analyses of the image data acquired during diagnostic CT scans. Lung segmentation proceeds on a section‐by‐section basis to construct a segmented lung volume within which further analysis is performed. Multiple gray‐level thresholds are applied to the segmented lung volume to create a series of thresholded lung volumes. An 18‐point connectivity scheme is used to identify contiguous three‐dimensional structures within each thresholded lung volume, and those structures that satisfy a volume criterion are selected as initial lung nodule candidates. Morphological and gray‐level features are computed for each nodule candidate. After a rule‐based approach is applied to greatly reduce the number of nodule candidates that corresponds to non‐nodules, the features of remaining candidates are merged through linear discriminant analysis. The automated method was applied to a database of 43 diagnostic thoracic CT scans. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the ability of the classifier to differentiate nodule candidates that correspond to actual nodules from false‐positive candidates. The area under the ROC curve for this categorization task attained a value of 0.90 during leave‐one‐out‐by‐case evaluation. The automated method yielded an overall nodule detection sensitivity of 70% with an average of 1.5 false‐positive detections per section when applied to the complete 43‐case database. A corresponding nodule detection sensitivity of 89% with an average of 1.3 false‐positive detections per section was achieved with a subset of 20 cases that contained only one or two nodules per case.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Giger, M. L., Chan, H., & Boone, J. (2008) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3013555 · Cited by 311
Self-citationGurcan, M. N., Sahiner, B., Petrick, N., Chan, H., Kazerooni, E. A., Cascade, P. N., & Hadjiiski, L. (2002) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.1515762 · Cited by 309
Rios Velazquez, E., Aerts, H. J. W. L., Gu, Y., Goldgof, D. B., De Ruysscher, D., Dekker, A., Korn, R., Gillies, R. J., & Lambin, P. (2012) · Radiotherapy and Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2012.09.023 · Cited by 120
Metadata
- Authors
- Armato, S. G., Giger, M. L., & MacMahon, H.
- Venue
- Medical Physics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-08
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1552-1561
- ISSN
- 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
- 2473-4209
- OpenAlex
- W2083432437
- Cited by
- 250
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.02
- 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: Automated detection of lung nodules in CT scans: Preliminary results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1118/1.1387272
- The paper
- Armato, S. G., Giger, M. L., & MacMahon, H. (2001). Automated detection of lung nodules in CT scans: Preliminary results. Medical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1387272
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.