1988
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-198804000-00005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computed Radiographic Evaluation of Simulated Pulmonary Nodules

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies have shown that 30% of all lung nodules can be missed on the first reading of a chest radiogram, even though the same nodules were clearly present on prior radiograms of the same patient [3], [33]. Reasons proposed for these false negatives include factors relating to the image such as the location of nodules within the chest [29], the size and number of nodules present [35], and the diagnostic quality of the images [27], [36]; as well as factors relating to the diagnostician, such as level of training [4], search versus nonsearch protocols [38], premature termination of the search [8]- [10], [31], and conservative decision criteria [26].…”
Section: B Computer-aided Diagnosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies have shown that 30% of all lung nodules can be missed on the first reading of a chest radiogram, even though the same nodules were clearly present on prior radiograms of the same patient [3], [33]. Reasons proposed for these false negatives include factors relating to the image such as the location of nodules within the chest [29], the size and number of nodules present [35], and the diagnostic quality of the images [27], [36]; as well as factors relating to the diagnostician, such as level of training [4], search versus nonsearch protocols [38], premature termination of the search [8]- [10], [31], and conservative decision criteria [26].…”
Section: B Computer-aided Diagnosismentioning
confidence: 99%