Cargando…

Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services

Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of different alternatives to implement low-cost screening telemammography. We compared computed radiography, film printed images, and digitized films produced with a specialized film digitizer and a digital camera....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Salazar, Antonio J., Romero, Javier A., Bernal, Oscar A., Moreno, Angela P., Velasco, Sofía C., Díaz, Xavier A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27777584
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3642960
_version_ 1782459677842341888
author Salazar, Antonio J.
Romero, Javier A.
Bernal, Oscar A.
Moreno, Angela P.
Velasco, Sofía C.
Díaz, Xavier A.
author_facet Salazar, Antonio J.
Romero, Javier A.
Bernal, Oscar A.
Moreno, Angela P.
Velasco, Sofía C.
Díaz, Xavier A.
author_sort Salazar, Antonio J.
collection PubMed
description Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of different alternatives to implement low-cost screening telemammography. We compared computed radiography, film printed images, and digitized films produced with a specialized film digitizer and a digital camera. Material and Methods. The ethics committee of our institution approved this study. We assessed the equivalence of the clinical performance of observers for cancer detection. The factorial design included 70 screening patients, four technological alternatives, and cases interpreted by seven radiologists, for a total of 1,960 observations. The variables evaluated were the positive predictive value (PPV), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Result. The mean values for the observed variables were as follows: accuracy ranged from 0.77 to 0.82, the PPV ranged from 0.67 to 0.68, sensitivity ranged from 0.64 to 0.74, specificity ranged from 0.87 to 0.90, and the AUC ranged from 0.87 to 0.90. At a difference of 0.1 to claim equivalence, all alternatives were equivalent for all variables. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that telemammography screening programs may be provided to underserved populations at a low cost, using a film digitizer or a digital camera.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5061957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50619572016-10-24 Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services Salazar, Antonio J. Romero, Javier A. Bernal, Oscar A. Moreno, Angela P. Velasco, Sofía C. Díaz, Xavier A. Int J Telemed Appl Research Article Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of different alternatives to implement low-cost screening telemammography. We compared computed radiography, film printed images, and digitized films produced with a specialized film digitizer and a digital camera. Material and Methods. The ethics committee of our institution approved this study. We assessed the equivalence of the clinical performance of observers for cancer detection. The factorial design included 70 screening patients, four technological alternatives, and cases interpreted by seven radiologists, for a total of 1,960 observations. The variables evaluated were the positive predictive value (PPV), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Result. The mean values for the observed variables were as follows: accuracy ranged from 0.77 to 0.82, the PPV ranged from 0.67 to 0.68, sensitivity ranged from 0.64 to 0.74, specificity ranged from 0.87 to 0.90, and the AUC ranged from 0.87 to 0.90. At a difference of 0.1 to claim equivalence, all alternatives were equivalent for all variables. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that telemammography screening programs may be provided to underserved populations at a low cost, using a film digitizer or a digital camera. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5061957/ /pubmed/27777584 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3642960 Text en Copyright © 2016 Antonio J. Salazar et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Salazar, Antonio J.
Romero, Javier A.
Bernal, Oscar A.
Moreno, Angela P.
Velasco, Sofía C.
Díaz, Xavier A.
Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title_full Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title_fullStr Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title_full_unstemmed Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title_short Noninferiority and Equivalence Evaluation of Clinical Performance among Computed Radiography, Film, and Digitized Film for Telemammography Services
title_sort noninferiority and equivalence evaluation of clinical performance among computed radiography, film, and digitized film for telemammography services
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27777584
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3642960
work_keys_str_mv AT salazarantonioj noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices
AT romerojaviera noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices
AT bernaloscara noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices
AT morenoangelap noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices
AT velascosofiac noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices
AT diazxaviera noninferiorityandequivalenceevaluationofclinicalperformanceamongcomputedradiographyfilmanddigitizedfilmfortelemammographyservices