Determining Thresholds for Computer-Aided Detection for Silicosis—An Analytic Approach

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Stephen Barker, Annalee Yassi, Jerry Spiegel, Barry Kistnasamy, Rodney Ehrlich
{"title":"Determining Thresholds for Computer-Aided Detection for Silicosis—An Analytic Approach","authors":"Stephen Barker,&nbsp;Annalee Yassi,&nbsp;Jerry Spiegel,&nbsp;Barry Kistnasamy,&nbsp;Rodney Ehrlich","doi":"10.1002/ajim.23720","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Computer-aided detection (CAD) is emerging as an adjunct to the use of the chest X-ray (CXR) in screening for pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). CAD for silicosis, a fibrotic lung disease due to silica dust and a strong risk factor for TB, is at an earlier stage of development and, unlike TB, depends on expert human reading for validation. For all CAD systems, an important step is the choice of threshold for classifying images as positive or negative for the disease in question. The objective of this article is to present an analytic approach to the choice of threshold in using CAD systems for silicosis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Drawing on receiver operating curve data from a published study on agreement between CAD and two expert readings of silicosis, two criteria for choosing the sensitivity/specificity combination were compared—the Youden Index and a minimum sensitivity of 90%. We explore the impact of criterion selection, silicosis definition, and reader on the choice and interpretation of threshold, as well as the influence of positive predictive value (PPV) derived from screen prevalence. We present a novel technique for using two CAD thresholds to distinguish images with a high likelihood of being of positive or negative from those characterized by uncertainty.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The sample was 501 CXR images from ex-gold miners. Derived thresholds varied across the two criteria, as well as across silicosis definition and expert reader. Varying the notional disease prevalence produced large differences in PPV and, therefore, proportions of false positives. The implications of these variations affecting threshold choice are described for three use cases—annual screening of active miners, outreach screening of former miners, and adjudication of claims for silicosis compensation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>In applying CAD to silicosis, users need to establish the use case, their preference for the sensitivity/specificity trade-off, and the silicosis definition, as well as considering the effect of disease prevalence. System developers need to take inter-reader variation in validation exercises into account and present this information transparently. A two-threshold model has potential utility in situations of high screening volume where there is a significant cost associated with referral for confirmation of diagnosis.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":"68 5","pages":"464-472"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajim.23720","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajim.23720","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Computer-aided detection (CAD) is emerging as an adjunct to the use of the chest X-ray (CXR) in screening for pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). CAD for silicosis, a fibrotic lung disease due to silica dust and a strong risk factor for TB, is at an earlier stage of development and, unlike TB, depends on expert human reading for validation. For all CAD systems, an important step is the choice of threshold for classifying images as positive or negative for the disease in question. The objective of this article is to present an analytic approach to the choice of threshold in using CAD systems for silicosis.

Methods

Drawing on receiver operating curve data from a published study on agreement between CAD and two expert readings of silicosis, two criteria for choosing the sensitivity/specificity combination were compared—the Youden Index and a minimum sensitivity of 90%. We explore the impact of criterion selection, silicosis definition, and reader on the choice and interpretation of threshold, as well as the influence of positive predictive value (PPV) derived from screen prevalence. We present a novel technique for using two CAD thresholds to distinguish images with a high likelihood of being of positive or negative from those characterized by uncertainty.

Results

The sample was 501 CXR images from ex-gold miners. Derived thresholds varied across the two criteria, as well as across silicosis definition and expert reader. Varying the notional disease prevalence produced large differences in PPV and, therefore, proportions of false positives. The implications of these variations affecting threshold choice are described for three use cases—annual screening of active miners, outreach screening of former miners, and adjudication of claims for silicosis compensation.

Conclusion

In applying CAD to silicosis, users need to establish the use case, their preference for the sensitivity/specificity trade-off, and the silicosis definition, as well as considering the effect of disease prevalence. System developers need to take inter-reader variation in validation exercises into account and present this information transparently. A two-threshold model has potential utility in situations of high screening volume where there is a significant cost associated with referral for confirmation of diagnosis.

Abstract Image

确定计算机辅助检测矽肺病的阈值-一种分析方法。
背景:计算机辅助检测(CAD)作为胸部x线(CXR)筛查肺结核(TB)的辅助手段正在兴起。矽肺病是一种由二氧化硅粉尘引起的纤维化肺病,是结核病的一个强大危险因素,其CAD尚处于早期发展阶段,与结核病不同,它依赖于专家的人类阅读来验证。对于所有CAD系统,一个重要的步骤是选择阈值,将图像分类为阳性或阴性的疾病。本文的目的是提出一种分析方法,以选择阈值在使用CAD系统的矽肺。方法:根据已发表的一项关于CAD与两份矽肺专家读数的一致性研究的受试者工作曲线数据,比较两种选择敏感性/特异性组合的标准——约登指数和最小灵敏度为90%。我们探讨了标准选择、矽肺定义和读者对阈值的选择和解释的影响,以及来自筛查患病率的阳性预测值(PPV)的影响。我们提出了一种新的技术,使用两个CAD阈值来区分具有高可能性的图像,从那些以不确定性为特征的阳性或阴性。结果:样本为前金矿工人的501张CXR图像。得出的阈值在两个标准之间,以及在矽肺定义和专家读者之间有所不同。不同的名义疾病流行率产生了PPV的巨大差异,因此,假阳性的比例。这些变化影响阈值选择的含义被描述为三个用例——在职矿工的年度筛选,前矿工的外联筛选,以及矽肺赔偿索赔的裁决。结论:在将CAD应用于矽肺病时,用户需要建立用例、对敏感性/特异性权衡的偏好、矽肺病的定义,并考虑疾病流行的影响。系统开发人员需要考虑验证练习中阅读器之间的差异,并透明地呈现这些信息。双阈值模型在高筛查量的情况下具有潜在的效用,其中转诊确认诊断的成本很高。
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
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
×
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