In an experimental study of reader experience in identifying the variables essential to grading bone neoplasms, reader error is measured against book grade, a human consensus of the presence or absence of key variables. The average accuracy for classifying focal lesions into slow or fast categories is 83.4% for 890 readings as compared with average diagnostic accuracy of 53.7%. Analyses of human error have provided insight into how to improve the grading algorithm without significant loss of its ability to separate lesions into meaningful categories.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.134.3.6986621DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

estimating rate
4
rate growth
4
growth bone
4
bone lesions
4
lesions observer
4
observer performance
4
performance error
4
error experimental
4
experimental study
4
study reader
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!