Cited by 77Tuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyAI in cancer detectionCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI

Detection of tuberculosis using digital chest radiography: automated reading vs. interpretation by clinical officers

Open access
Maduskar, P., Muyoyeta, M., Ayles, H., Hogeweg, L., Peters-Bax, L., van Ginneken, B.·2013·The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease

Abstract

SETTING: A busy urban health centre in Lusaka, Zambia. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of automated reading (CAD4TB) with the interpretation of digital chest radiograph (CXR) by clinical officers for the detection of tuberculosis (TB). DESIGN: A retrospective analysis was performed on 161 subjects enrolled in a TB specimen bank study. CXRs were analysed using CAD4TB, which computed an image abnormality score (0-100). Four clinical officers scored the CXRs for abnormalities consistent with TB. We compared the automated readings and the readings by clinical officers against the bacteriological and radiological results used as reference. We report here the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: Of 161 enrolled subjects, 97 had bacteriologically confirmed TB and 120 had abnormal CXR. The AUCs for CAD4TB and the clinical officers were respectively 0.73 and 0.65-0.75 in comparison with the bacteriological reference, and 0.91 and 0.89-0.94 in comparison with the radiological reference. P values indicated no significant differences, except for one clinical officer who performed significantly worse than CAD4TB (P < 0.05) using the bacteriological reference. κ values for CAD4TB and clinical officers with radiological reference were respectively 0.61 and 0.49-0.67. CONCLUSION: CXR assessment using CAD4TB and by clinical officers is comparable. CAD4TB has potential as a point-of-care test and for the automated identification of subjects who require further examinations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5588/ijtld.13.0325

Cites

1 of 1 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maduskar, P., Muyoyeta, M., Ayles, H., Hogeweg, L., Peters-Bax, L., & van Ginneken, B.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • University of Zambia (ZM)
Corresponding author
Maduskar, P.
Venue
The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
Published
2013-12-01
Volume
17
Issue
12
Pages
1613-1620
ISSN
  • 1027-3719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1815-7920
OpenAlex
W2319324829
Cited by
77
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4
FWCI
5.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Keywords
tuberculosis detection, digital chest radiography, computer-aided diagnosis, CAD4TB, clinical officers, radiographic interpretation, automated image analysis, point-of-care testing, bacteriological confirmation, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Competence, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Male, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies, Radiography, Thoracic, Tuberculosis, Pulmonary, Zambia, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation, Treatment Outcome, Urban Health Services, Area Under Curve, Automation, Laboratory

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