233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23039631)
1. Correlation of free-response and receiver-operating-characteristic area-under-the-curve estimates: results from independently conducted FROC∕ROC studies in mammography.
Zanca F; Hillis SL; Claus F; Van Ongeval C; Celis V; Provoost V; Yoon HJ; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):5917-29. PubMed ID: 23039631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On the meaning of the weighted alternative free-response operating characteristic figure of merit.
Chakraborty DP; Zhai X
Med Phys; 2016 May; 43(5):2548. PubMed ID: 27147365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Application of threshold-bias independent analysis to eye-tracking and FROC data.
Chakraborty DP; Yoon HJ; Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2012 Dec; 19(12):1474-83. PubMed ID: 23040503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. [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]
7. Quantifying the clinical relevance of a laboratory observer performance paradigm.
Chakraborty DP; Haygood TM; Ryan J; Marom EM; Evanoff M; McEntee MF; Brennan PC
Br J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 85(1017):1287-302. PubMed ID: 22573296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of visual grading and free-response ROC analyses for assessment of image-processing algorithms in digital mammography.
Zanca F; Van Ongeval C; Claus F; Jacobs J; Oyen R; Bosmans H
Br J Radiol; 2012 Dec; 85(1020):e1233-41. PubMed ID: 22844032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Nonparametric signal detectability evaluation using an exponential transformation of the FROC curve.
Popescu LM
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5690-702. PubMed ID: 21992384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Area under the free-response ROC curve (FROC) and a related summary index.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Song T; Gur D
Biometrics; 2009 Mar; 65(1):247-56. PubMed ID: 18479482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Agreement of the order of overall performance levels under different reading paradigms.
Gur D; Bandos AI; Klym AH; Cohen CS; Hakim CM; Hardesty LA; Ganott MA; Perrin RL; Poller WR; Shah R; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Rockette HE
Acad Radiol; 2008 Dec; 15(12):1567-73. PubMed ID: 19000873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ideal AFROC and FROC observers.
Khurd P; Liu B; Gindi G
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2010 Feb; 29(2):375-86. PubMed ID: 20129845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Relationship between Roe and Metz simulation model for multireader diagnostic data and Obuchowski-Rockette model parameters.
Hillis SL
Stat Med; 2018 Jun; 37(13):2067-2093. PubMed ID: 29609206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. On the comparison of FROC curves in mammography CAD systems.
Bornefalk H; Hermansson AB
Med Phys; 2005 Feb; 32(2):412-7. PubMed ID: 15789587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Operating characteristics predicted by models for diagnostic tasks involving lesion localization.
Chakraborty DP; Yoon HJ
Med Phys; 2008 Feb; 35(2):435-45. PubMed ID: 18383663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy in free-response detection-localization tasks using ROC tools.
Bandos AI; Obuchowski NA
Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jun; 28(6):1808-1825. PubMed ID: 29921163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Observer studies involving detection and localization: modeling, analysis, and validation.
Chakraborty DP; Berbaum KS
Med Phys; 2004 Aug; 31(8):2313-30. PubMed ID: 15377098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of image quality on calcification detection in digital mammography.
Warren LM; Mackenzie A; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Wallis MG; Chakraborty DP; Dance DR; Bosmans H; Young KC
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6):3202-13. PubMed ID: 22755704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
