Back to the list
Congress: ECR24
Poster Number: C-14447
Type: EPOS Radiologist (scientific)
Authorblock: P. Rogalla1, C. Farrell1, X. Niu2, J. Zhou2, L. Cai2, S. Ross2, A. Rai1, S. Kandel1, Z. Yu2; 1Toronto, ON/CA, 2Vernon Hills, IL/US
Disclosures:
Patrik Rogalla: Research/Grant Support: Canon Medical Systems
Christin Farrell: Nothing to disclose
Xiaofeng Niu: Employee: Canon Medical Systems
Jian Zhou: Employee: Canon Medical Systems
Liang Cai: Employee: Canon Medical Systems
Steven Ross: Employee: Canon Medical Systems
Archana Rai: Nothing to disclose
Sonja Kandel: Nothing to disclose
Zhou Yu: Employee: Canon Medical Systems
Keywords: Lung, CT, Acceptance testing, Image verification
Results

Reported p values refer to the differences between series I and III, as well as between series I and IV. The mean ratings across series I-IV were as follows: 3.1/3.7/4.3/4.8 for category A (both p<0.001); 3.2/4.1/4.1/3.5 for category B (p<0.001, p=0.002); 3.0/3.8/4.5/4.8 for category C1 (both p<0.001); 3.0/4.2/4.2/3.4 for category C2 (both p<0.001); 4.3/4.3/4.4/4.4 for category D1 (p=0.02, p=0.03); 4.2/4.4/4.3/4.2 for category D2 (p=0.25, p=0.79); 3.1/3.8/4.4/4.8 for category E1 (both p<0.001); and 3.1/4.1/3.9/3.4 for category E2 (both p<0.001). Furthermore, the mean overall diagnostic confidence ranking was 3.9/2.9/2.1/1.1 for lung (both p<0.001) and 3.5/1.9/1.9/2.7 for tissue (both p<0.001) across series I-IV, respectively. Figure 2 shows a magnification of a direct comparison between series II (DLR) and IV (SR-DLR). Figure 3 summarizes the results.
GALLERY