(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds. If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Terms and Conditions for Use
Click on image to view larger version.
View larger version (102K)
Figure a. Graphs show fitted ROC curves for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and screen-film mammography (SFM). (a) Mean ROC curves for all cases (n = 232) and all six readers on the basis of the BI-RADS classification: Az value for digital mammography was 0.916; that for screen-film mammography, 0.887 (P = .22). (b) Mean ROC curves for all cases (n = 232) and all six readers on the basis of the five-point rating scale for probability of malignancy: Az value for digital mammography was 0.925; that for screen-film mammography, 0.893 (P = .25). (c) Mean ROC curves for all benign and malignant densities and masses (n = 71) and all six readers on the basis of the BI-RADS classification: Az value for digital mammography was 0.860; that for screen-film mammography, 0.835 (P = .646). The six cancers that manifested as masses with associated microcalcifications were excluded from analysis. (d) Mean ROC curves for cases with benign findings that manifested as microcalcifications (n = 43) and cancer cases that manifested as microcalcifications (n = 14) and four readers on the basis of the BI-RADS classification. Az value for digital mammography was 0.841; that for screen-film mammography, 0.787. This difference was not significant. FPF = false-positive fraction, TPF = true-positive fraction.
