Cited by 306AI in cancer detectionArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Computer-aided Diagnosis: How to Move from the Laboratory to the Clinic

Open access
van Ginneken, Bram, Schaefer-Prokop, Cornelia M., Prokop, Mathias·2011·Radiology

Abstract

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD), encompassing computer-aided detection and quantification, is an established and rapidly growing field of research. In daily practice, however, most radiologists do not yet use CAD routinely. This article discusses how to move CAD from the laboratory to the clinic. The authors review the principles of CAD for lesion detection and for quantification and illustrate the state-of-the-art with various examples. The requirements that radiologists have for CAD are discussed: sufficient performance, no increase in reading time, seamless workflow integration, regulatory approval, and cost efficiency. Performance is still the major bottleneck for many CAD systems. Novel ways of using CAD, extending the traditional paradigm of displaying markers for a second look, may be the key to using the technology effectively. The most promising strategy to improve CAD is the creation of publicly available databases for training and validation. This can identify the most fruitful new research directions, and provide a platform to combine multiple approaches for a single task to create superior algorithms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.11091710

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Literature has mainly blamed the failure of early CAD systems on low technical performance, while other potential barriers such as organizational or social aspects have been largely ignored.

    “Literature has mainly blamed this on low technical performance of these early applications [5, 14–16], while other potential barriers to successful implementation, such as organizational or social aspects, have been largely ignored [17].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Ginneken, B., Schaefer-Prokop, C. M., & Prokop, M.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Venue
Radiology
Published
2011-12
Volume
261
Issue
3
Pages
719-732
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2167896953
Cited by
306
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
computer-aided diagnosis, computer-aided detection, lesion quantification, workflow integration, regulatory approval, cost efficiency
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Diagnostic Imaging, Humans, Radiology Information Systems, Software, Biomarkers, Biomedical Research

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