Authors: Emma Helbren Thomas R Fanshawe Peter Phillips Susan Mallett Darren Boone Alastair Gale Douglas G Altman Stuart A Taylor David Manning Steve Halligan
Publish Date: 2015/01/12
Volume: 25, Issue: 6, Pages: 1570-1578
Abstract
Fifteen endoluminal CTC examinations were recorded each with one polyp and two videos were generated one with and one without a CAD mark Fortytwo readers 17 experienced 25 inexperienced interpreted the videos during infrared visual search recording CAD markers and polyps were treated as regions of interest in data processing This multireader multicase study was analysed using multilevel modellingCAD drew readers’ attention to polyps faster accelerating identification times median ‘time to first pursuit’ was 048 s IQR 027 to 087 s with CAD versus 058 s IQR 035 to 106 s without For inexperienced readers CAD also held visual attention for longer All visual search metrics used to assess visual gaze behaviour demonstrated statistically significant differences when “with” and “without” CAD were compared A significant increase in the number of correct polyp identifications across all readers was seen with CAD 74 without CAD 87 with CAD p 0001The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof Steve Halligan The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies Vital Images Vital Images Inc Minnetonka Minnesota USA and iCAD iCAD Inc Fairborn Ohio USA provided a medical image workstation used for this research This study was funded by the National Institute for Health NIHR Research under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme RPPG040710338 Three of the authors are statisticians Institutional Review Board approval was obtained Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects observers in this study No study subjects or cohorts have been previously reported Methodology prospective experimental multicenter study
Keywords: