Investigation of and preliminary results for the solution of the inter-observer variability problem using fine needle aspirate (FNA) data

W. Land, Lewis A. Loren, T. Masters
{"title":"Investigation of and preliminary results for the solution of the inter-observer variability problem using fine needle aspirate (FNA) data","authors":"W. Land, Lewis A. Loren, T. Masters","doi":"10.1109/CEC.1999.785489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper provides a preliminary evaluation of the accuracy of computer aided diagnostics (CAD) in addressing the inconsistencies of inter-observer variance scoring. The inter-observer variability problem, in this case, relates to different cytopathologists and radiologists at separate locations scoring the same type of samples differently using the same methodologies and environmental discriminates. Two distinctly different FNA data sets were used. The first was the data collected at the University of Wisconsin (Wolberg data set) while the other was a completely independent one defined and processed at the Breast Cancer Center, University Health Center at Syracuse (Syracuse data set). Two computer aided diagnostic (CAD) paradigms were used: the evolutionary programming (EP)/probabilistic neural network (PNN) hybrid and a mean of predictors model. Four experiments mere performed to evaluate the hybrid. The fourth experiment, k-fold crossover validation, resulted in a 91.25% average classification accuracy with a .9783 average Az index. The mean of predictors model was used to verify the results of the more complex hybrid using both the fraction of missed malignancies (Type II errors) and fraction of false malignancies (Type I errors). The EP/PNN hybrid experiments resulted in a 3.05% mean value of missed malignancies (Type II) and a 5.69% mean value of false malignancies (Type I errors) using the k-fold crossover studies. The mean of predictors model provided a.429% mean Type II error and a 4.09% mean Type I error.","PeriodicalId":292523,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406)","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.1999.785489","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper provides a preliminary evaluation of the accuracy of computer aided diagnostics (CAD) in addressing the inconsistencies of inter-observer variance scoring. The inter-observer variability problem, in this case, relates to different cytopathologists and radiologists at separate locations scoring the same type of samples differently using the same methodologies and environmental discriminates. Two distinctly different FNA data sets were used. The first was the data collected at the University of Wisconsin (Wolberg data set) while the other was a completely independent one defined and processed at the Breast Cancer Center, University Health Center at Syracuse (Syracuse data set). Two computer aided diagnostic (CAD) paradigms were used: the evolutionary programming (EP)/probabilistic neural network (PNN) hybrid and a mean of predictors model. Four experiments mere performed to evaluate the hybrid. The fourth experiment, k-fold crossover validation, resulted in a 91.25% average classification accuracy with a .9783 average Az index. The mean of predictors model was used to verify the results of the more complex hybrid using both the fraction of missed malignancies (Type II errors) and fraction of false malignancies (Type I errors). The EP/PNN hybrid experiments resulted in a 3.05% mean value of missed malignancies (Type II) and a 5.69% mean value of false malignancies (Type I errors) using the k-fold crossover studies. The mean of predictors model provided a.429% mean Type II error and a 4.09% mean Type I error.
使用细针吸吸(FNA)数据解决观察者间变异问题的调查和初步结果
本文提供了计算机辅助诊断(CAD)在解决观察者间方差评分不一致的准确性的初步评价。在这种情况下,观察者之间的可变性问题涉及不同地点的不同细胞病理学家和放射科医生使用相同的方法和环境歧视对相同类型的样本进行不同的评分。使用了两种截然不同的FNA数据集。第一个是威斯康星大学收集的数据(Wolberg数据集),而另一个是由锡拉丘兹大学健康中心乳腺癌中心定义和处理的完全独立的数据(锡拉丘兹数据集)。采用两种计算机辅助诊断(CAD)模型:进化规划(EP)/概率神经网络(PNN)混合模型和预测因子均值模型。对该杂交品种进行了4次试验。第四个实验,k-fold交叉验证,平均分类准确率为91.25%,平均Az指数为0.9783。预测因子模型的平均值用于验证更复杂的混合结果,同时使用未检出恶性肿瘤的比例(II型错误)和假恶性肿瘤的比例(I型错误)。EP/PNN混合实验结果显示,使用k倍交叉研究,遗漏恶性肿瘤(II型)的平均值为3.05%,假恶性肿瘤(I型错误)的平均值为5.69%。预测因子模型的平均II型误差为4.429%,平均I型误差为4.09%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信