Skip to main content
. 2023 Sep 19;14:149. doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01497-4

Table 4.

Subgroup analysis of the LLFs in danger zone nodule

DLD system p-value Thoracic radiologists p-value Non-thoracic radiologists p-value Radiology residents p-value
Location
Apical lung zone 87.9 (29/33) 0.002* 84.9 (56/66) 0.319 69.7 (46/66) 0.032* 65.9 (87/132) 0.120
Paramediastinal 52.5 (31/59) 78.8 (93/118) 53.4 (63/118) 57.6 (136/236)
Retrodiaphragmatic 58.8 (10/17) 85.3 (29/34) 41.2 (14/34) 35.3 (24/68)
Visibility score
 1 16.7 (1/6) 0.169 33.3 (4/12) 0.129 16.7 (2/12) 0.271 20.8 (5/24) 0.066
 2 50.0 (12/24) 58.3 (28/48) 33.3 (16/48) 41.7 (40/96)
 3 64.4 (38/59) 90.7 (107/118) 60.2 (71/118) 58.5 (138/236)
 4 95.0 (19/20) 97.5 (39/40) 85.0 (34/40) 80.0 (64/80)
Size
 ≤ 2 cm 48.5 (33/68) < 0.001* 74.3 (101/136) < 0.001* 47.1 (64/136) < 0.001* 47.8 (130/272) < 0.001*
 > 2 cm 90.2 (37/41) 93.9 (77/82) 71.9 (59/82) 71.3 (117/164)

DLD Deep learning-based nodule detection, LLF Lesion localization fraction

*p < 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant. Denominator for the LLF calculation corresponds to the total number of true lesions multiplied by the number of readers in the respective group