266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16321746)
1. Perceptually based FROC analysis.
Arora R; Kundel HL; Beam CA
Acad Radiol; 2005 Dec; 12(12):1567-74. PubMed ID: 16321746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Recent advances in observer performance methodology: jackknife free-response ROC (JAFROC).
Chakraborty DP
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):26-31. PubMed ID: 15933077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Performance assessment of mammographic diagnostic systems: evolution of methods and their application to a digital image study].
Compagnone G; Ferruzzi K; Pierotti L; Vianello Vos C; Berardi P; Bergamini C
Radiol Med; 1999 Mar; 97(3):179-87. PubMed ID: 10363062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A global goodness-of-fit test for receiver operating characteristic curve analysis via the bootstrap method.
Zou KH; Resnic FS; Talos IF; Goldberg-Zimring D; Bhagwat JG; Haker SJ; Kikinis R; Jolesz FA; Ohno-Machado L
J Biomed Inform; 2005 Oct; 38(5):395-403. PubMed ID: 16198998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A new parametric method based on S-distributions for computing receiver operating characteristic curves for continuous diagnostic tests.
Sorribas A; March J; Trujillano J
Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(9):1213-35. PubMed ID: 12111875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Free-response receiver operating characteristic evaluation of lossy JPEG2000 and object-based set partitioning in hierarchical trees compression of digitized mammograms.
Penedo M; Souto M; Tahoces PG; Carreira JM; Villalón J; Porto G; Seoane C; Vidal JJ; Berbaum KS; Chakraborty DP; Fajardo LL
Radiology; 2005 Nov; 237(2):450-7. PubMed ID: 16244253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Analysis of location specific observer performance data: validated extensions of the jackknife free-response (JAFROC) method.
Chakraborty DP
Acad Radiol; 2006 Oct; 13(10):1187-93. PubMed ID: 16979067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A permutation test for comparing ROC curves in multireader studies a multi-reader ROC, permutation test.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2006 Apr; 13(4):414-20. PubMed ID: 16554220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. On-axis and off-axis viewing of images on CRT displays and LCDs: observer performance and vision model predictions.
Krupinski EA; Johnson J; Roehrig H; Nafziger J; Lubin J
Acad Radiol; 2005 Aug; 12(8):957-64. PubMed ID: 16023384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reader variability in mammography and its implications for expected utility over the population of readers and cases.
Wagner RF; Beam CA; Beiden SV
Med Decis Making; 2004; 24(6):561-72. PubMed ID: 15534338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Continuous versus categorical data for ROC analysis: some quantitative considerations.
Wagner RF; Beiden SV; Metz CE
Acad Radiol; 2001 Apr; 8(4):328-34. PubMed ID: 11293781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Components-of-variance models for random-effects ROC analysis: the case of unequal variance structures across modalities.
Beiden SV; Wagner RF; Campbell G; Metz CE; Jiang Y
Acad Radiol; 2001 Jul; 8(7):605-15. PubMed ID: 11450961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Localized detection and classification of abnormalities on FFDM and tomosynthesis examinations rated under an FROC paradigm.
Gur D; Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Chough DM; Hakim CM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Mar; 196(3):737-41. PubMed ID: 21343521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The use of the 'binormal' model for parametric ROC analysis of quantitative diagnostic tests.
Hanley JA
Stat Med; 1996 Jul; 15(14):1575-85. PubMed ID: 8855483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment.
Chakraborty DP; Winter LH
Radiology; 1990 Mar; 174(3 Pt 1):873-81. PubMed ID: 2305073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mathematical modeling improves computed tomography diagnosis of traumatic aortic injury.
Fetzer DT; Green C; West OC
Acad Radiol; 2006 Oct; 13(10):1244-53. PubMed ID: 16979074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Spatial localization accuracy of radiologists in free-response studies: Inferring perceptual FROC curves from mark-rating data.
Chakraborty D; Yoon HJ; Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2007 Jan; 14(1):4-18. PubMed ID: 17178361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Is an ROC-type response truly always better than a binary response in observer performance studies?
Gur D; Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Zuley ML; Hakim CM; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Sumkin JH
Acad Radiol; 2010 May; 17(5):639-45. PubMed ID: 20236840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
