Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Acad Radiol. 2010 Jun 12;17(8):948–959. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.03.024

Table 5.

False Positive Radiologist Findings According to Whether the CAD Marks were Intentionally Spatially Co-located on Supine and Prone Scans

Reader Non-Matched FPs Matched FPs
1 12 1
2 28 0
3 14 0
4 10 1
Average 64/1788*
3.6%
2/72
2.8%

Data are numbers (%) of false positive radiologist diagnoses according to whether the false positive was intentionally matched by the experimenters with a false positive in the same approximate location of the colon on the other scan. Multiple counts for some of the same false positives for readers and readings were included. The 72 matched false positives consist of a pair of false positives in each of 9 normal patients interpreted by each of four readers.

*

Includes 16 false positives (4 for each reader) on the same object, believed to be an inverted diverticulum that was very polyp-like in appearance; and 12 false positives on the same 6 mm hyperplastic polyp.