2012
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/75768386
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of sensitivity of lung nodule detection between radiologists and technologists on low-dose CT lung cancer screening images

Abstract: Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of detection of lung nodules on low-dose screening CT images between radiologists and technologists. Methods: 11 radiologists and 10 technologists read the low-dose screening CT images of 78 subjects. On images with a slice thickness of 5 mm, there were 60 lung nodules that were $5 mm in diameter: 26 nodules with pure ground-glass opacity (GGO), 7 nodules with mixed ground-glass opacity (GGO with a solid component) and 27 solid nodules. On … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(24 reference statements)
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many lung cancers are found at a relatively late stage, resulting in a 5-year survival of only 15% or less [2]. Low-dose CT is a promising screening method for early detection of lung cancer [3][4][5][6][7]. The first result indicates that CT lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality [8].…”
Section: Advances In Knowledgementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Many lung cancers are found at a relatively late stage, resulting in a 5-year survival of only 15% or less [2]. Low-dose CT is a promising screening method for early detection of lung cancer [3][4][5][6][7]. The first result indicates that CT lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality [8].…”
Section: Advances In Knowledgementioning
confidence: 99%
“…That protocol has been widely applied in lung cancer screening [3]. However, variability of nodule volumetry depends on acquisition and algorithm in individual settings [7,35]. When discussing the results, we linked to the studies based on the same CT acquisition protocol [5,10,11,17].…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,12,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Caution should always be exercised when comparing sensitivities between nodule detection studies, as differences in the derivation and stringency of the reference standard (as indicated in Table 4) 28 and in the types of patients undergoing CT examinations (e.g. patients with multiple metastases vs lung screening studies) may profoundly affect sensitivity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Radiographers may be suited for this task, as they have a basic understanding of both the technical and anatomical aspects of thoracic CT. Radiographers have already been assessed as readers in screening mammography 7,8 and screening CT colonography, 9,10 but their role as readers in CT lung cancer screening has not yet been fully explored in a prospective study. 11,12 However, before radiographers can be incorporated into the CT reading process, it is imperative that: (1) they are provided with a basic level of training; and (2) their performance is then assessed against the established methodology of various screening trials, in which radiologists perform all reading. The aim of this investigation was therefore to evaluate the performance of radiographers in lung nodule detection on CT (following a period of training) compared with radiologists in the setting of the UK Lung Screening (UKLS) pilot trial.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To optimise screening efficiency, sensitive lung nodule detection and accurate nodule classification are two important issues [10][11][12]. Little is known about the impact of readers in lung cancer screening on screening efficiency, in terms of reduction of false-positive results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%