메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
오유환 (고려대학교 의과대학 진단방사선과학교실)
저널정보
대한영상의학회 대한방사선의학회지 대한방사선의학회지 제38권 제1호
발행연도
1998.1
수록면
67 - 74 (8page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Purpose : The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the conventional method and Bayesian analysisin estimating the probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules. Materials and Methods : The studyinvolved 83 pathologically proven cases of solitary pulmon ary nodules, 44 of which were malignant, and 39,benign. To estimate the probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules, chest radiographs and CT scans ofthe 83 patients were interpreted by a team of six ; three of the six used the conventional method of subjectiveinterpretation and the others. Bayesian analysis. The smoking history of 59 of the patients was obtained, and itwas decided whether this would help determine the probability of malignancy. Results : On average, those using theconventional method correctly interpreted 34.7(78.9%) of 44 cases of malignant nodules and 27.7(71%) of 39 benignnodules, while those using Bayesian analysis correctly classified 32.3 cases of malignant nodules(73.4%) and 25.3cases of benign nodules(64.9%). Between the two teams, there was no statistically significant difference in theaccuracy of qualitative assessment(P>.05). In ROC analysis conventional interpretation and Bayesian analysisshowed an accuracy of Az=80.8 and Az=76.7, respectively. Among 59 patients known to have smoked, the conventionalmethod showed an accuracy of Az=79.0 without this knowledge and Az=80.2 with the knowledge for Bayesian analysis,the corresponding figures were Az=77.2 and Az=72.5, respectively. Information relating to smoking history thus didnot significantly improve the accuracy of prediction(p>.05). Conclusion : For estimating the probability ofmalignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules, the accuacy of the conventional method of interpretation is notsignificantly different from that of Bayesian analysis; information relating to smoking history significantlyimprove the accuracy of neither method.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0