Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lung nodule detection on thoracic computed tomography images: Preliminary evaluation of a computer‐aided diagnosis system

Open access
Gurcan, Metin N., Sahiner, Berkman, Petrick, Nicholas, Chan, Heang‐Ping, Kazerooni, Ella A., Cascade, Philip N., Hadjiiski, Lubomir·2002·Medical Physics

Abstract

We are developing a computer‐aided diagnosis (CAD) system for lung nodule detection on thoracic helical computed tomography (CT) images. In the first stage of this CAD system, lung regions are identified by a k‐means clustering technique. Each lung slice is classified as belonging to the upper, middle, or the lower part of the lung volume. Within each lung region, structures are segmented again using weighted k‐means clustering. These structures may include true lung nodules and normal structures consisting mainly of blood vessels. Rule‐based classifiers are designed to distinguish nodules and normal structures using 2D and 3D features. After rule‐based classification, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is used to further reduce the number of false positive (FP) objects. We performed a preliminary study using 1454 CT slices from 34 patients with 63 lung nodules. When only LDA classification was applied to the segmented objects, the sensitivity was 84% (53/63) with 5.48 (7961/1454) FP objects per slice. When rule‐based classification was used before LDA, the free response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) curve improved over the entire sensitivity and specificity ranges of interest. In particular, the FP rate decreased to 1.74 (2530/1454) objects per slice at the same sensitivity. Thus, compared to FP reduction with LDA alone, the inclusion of rule‐based classification lead to an improvement in detection accuracy for the CAD system. These preliminary results demonstrate the feasibility of our approach to lung nodule detection and FP reduction on CT images.

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 · 10.1118/1.1515762

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 14 references

Metadata

Authors
Gurcan, M. N., Sahiner, B., Petrick, N., Chan, H., Kazerooni, E. A., Cascade, P. N., & Hadjiiski, L.
Venue
Medical Physics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-10-23
Volume
29
Issue
11
Pages
2552-2558
ISSN
  • 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
  • 2473-4209
OpenAlex
W2085652537
Cited by
309
References
14
FWCI
16.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Lung nodule detection on thoracic computed tomography images: Preliminary evaluation of a computer‐aided diagnosis system. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1118/1.1515762
The paper
Gurcan, M. N., Sahiner, B., Petrick, N., Chan, H., Kazerooni, E. A., Cascade, P. N., & Hadjiiski, L. (2002). Lung nodule detection on thoracic computed tomography images: Preliminary evaluation of a computer‐aided diagnosis system. Medical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1515762

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.