The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pulmonary Nodules at Chest CT: Effect of Computer-aided Diagnosis on Radiologists’ Detection Performance
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) on radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty chest computed tomographic (CT) examination cases were used. The mean nodule size was 0.81 cm +/- 0.60 (SD) (range, 0.3-2.9 cm). Alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with a continuous rating scale was used to compare the observers' performance in detecting nodules with and without use of CAD. Five board-certified radiologists and five radiology residents participated in an observer performance study. First they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence without using CAD; then they were asked to rate the probability of nodule presence by using CAD. RESULTS: For all radiologists, the mean areas under the best-fit alternative free-response ROC curves (Az) without and with CAD were 0.64 +/- 0.08 and 0.67 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five board-certified radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.63 +/- 0.08 and 0.66 +/- 0.09, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). For the five resident radiologists, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.66 +/- 0.04 and 0.68 +/- 0.04, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P =.02). At observer performance analyses, there were no significant differences in Az values obtained either without (P =.61) or with (P =.88) CAD between the board-certified radiologists and the residents. For all radiologists, in the detection of pulmonary nodules 1.0 cm in diameter or smaller, the mean Az values without and with CAD were 0.60 +/- 0.11 and 0.64 +/- 0.11, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Use of the CAD system improved the board-certified radiologists' and residents' detection of pulmonary nodules at chest CT.
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
Improving the radiologist-CAD interaction: designing for appropriate trust
Jorritsma, W., Cnossen, F., & van Ooijen, P. M. A. (2015) · Clinical Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.crad.2014.09.017 · Cited by 61
Li, D., Pehrson, L. M., Lauridsen, C. A., Tøttrup, L., Fraccaro, M., Elliott, D., Zając, H. D., Darkner, S., Carlsen, J. F., & Nielsen, M. B. (2021) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics11122206 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Awai, K., Murao, K., Ozawa, A., Komi, M., Hayakawa, H., Hori, S., & Nishimura, Y.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2004-02
- Volume
- 230
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 347-352
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2048561164
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.96
- 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: Pulmonary Nodules at Chest CT: Effect of Computer-aided Diagnosis on Radiologists’ Detection Performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2302030049
- The paper
- Awai, K., Murao, K., Ozawa, A., Komi, M., Hayakawa, H., Hori, S., & Nishimura, Y. (2004). Pulmonary Nodules at Chest CT: Effect of Computer-aided Diagnosis on Radiologists’ Detection Performance. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2302030049
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.