| How to Discriminate between Computer-Aided and Computer-Hindered Decisions: A Case Study in Mammography. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 23300205 Owner: NLM Status: In-Data-Review |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
BACKGROUND: Computer aids can affect decisions in complex ways, potentially even making them worse; common assessment methods may miss these effects. We developed a method for estimating the quality of decisions, as well as how computer aids affect it, and applied it to computer-aided detection (CAD) of cancer, reanalyzing data from a published study where 50 professionals ("readers") interpreted 180 mammograms, both with and without computer support. METHOD: . We used stepwise regression to estimate how CAD affected the probability of a reader making a correct screening decision on a patient with cancer (sensitivity), thereby taking into account the effects of the difficulty of the cancer (proportion of readers who missed it) and the reader's discriminating ability (Youden's determinant). Using regression estimates, we obtained thresholds for classifying a posteriori the cases (by difficulty) and the readers (by discriminating ability). RESULTS: . Use of CAD was associated with a 0.016 increase in sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.003-0.028) for the 44 least discriminating radiologists for 45 relatively easy, mostly CAD-detected cancers. However, for the 6 most discriminating radiologists, with CAD, sensitivity decreased by 0.145 (95% CI, 0.034-0.257) for the 15 relatively difficult cancers. CONCLUSIONS: . Our exploratory analysis method reveals unexpected effects. It indicates that, despite the original study detecting no significant average effect, CAD helped the less discriminating readers but hindered the more discriminating readers. Such differential effects, although subtle, may be clinically significant and important for improving both computer algorithms and protocols for their use. They should be assessed when evaluating CAD and similar warning systems. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Andrey A Povyakalo; Eugenio Alberdi; Lorenzo Strigini; Peter Ayton |
Related Documents
:
|
23614655 - Uptake and patterns of use of gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a populatio... 23270095 - Maximizing the cancer registry role and data utilization. 23504585 - Biliary tract cancer incidence in the united states- demographic and temporal variation... 19060605 - Management of chronic pain in cancer survivors. 1696315 - Decision making in advanced cancer of the head and neck: variation in the views of medi... 21428155 - Effects of streamlining cervical cancer screening the dutch way: consequences of change... |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making Volume: 33 ISSN: 1552-681X ISO Abbreviation: Med Decis Making Publication Date: 2013 Jan |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2013-01-09 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 8109073 Medline TA: Med Decis Making Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 98-107 Citation Subset: IM |
Affiliation:
|
Centre for Software Reliability, City University London, Northampton Square, London, UK (AAP, EA, LS). |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Incorporating patient decision AIDS into standard clinical practice in an integrated delivery system...
Next Document: Motor and Premotor Cortices in Subcortical Stroke: Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Measures a...