Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Submit a response
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow reprints & permissions

© RSNA, 2007







Coronary Arteries: Diagnostic Performance of 16- versus 64-Section Spiral CT Compared with Invasive Coronary Angiography—Meta-Analysis


Supplemental Figures

Fig E1
Figure E1: Plots and tables of per-patient sensitivities for 16- and 64-section CT compared with coronary angiography.

Fig E3
Figure E2: Plots and tables of per-patient specificities for 16- and 64-section CT compared with coronary angiography.

Fig E3
Figure E3: Plots and tables of per-patient positive LRs for 16- and 64-section CT compared with coronary angiography.

Fig E4
Figure E4: Plots and tables of per-patient negative LRs for 16- and 64-section CT compared with coronary angiography.

Fig E5
Figure E5: Plots and tables of per-patient diagnostic odds ratios (OR) for 16- and 64-section CT compared with coronary angiography.

Fig E6
Figure E6: Funnel plots for 16- and 64-section CT on a per-patient basis.




This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Submit a response
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow reprints & permissions

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE