Skip to main content
. 2016 Nov 14;30(2):228–233. doi: 10.1007/s10278-016-9927-4

Table 2.

Accuracy of automatically extracted imaging findings compared to manual gold standard review

Imaging Finding Prevalence (%) Precision (95 % CI) Recall (95 % CI) F measure
Screening mammography N = 200 Positive BI-RADS 26/79 (33%) 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) 1.0
Calcification 6/200 (3%) 0.3 (0.1, 0.5) 1.0 (0.5, 1.0) 0.4
Mass 4/200 (2%) 0.6 (0.1, 0.9) 0.8 (0.2, 1.0) 0.7
Architectural distortiona 7/200 (4%) 1.0 (0.6, 1.0) 1.0 (0.6, 1.0) 1.0
Asymmetry 15/200 (8%) 0.8 (0.5, 1.0) 0.7 (0.4, 0.9) 0.7
Diagnostic mammography N = 182 Positive BI-RADS 13/67 (19%) 1.0 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9
Calcification 27/182 (15%) 0.5 (0.3, 0.6) 0.8 (0.6, 0.9) 0.6
Mass 24/182 (13%) 0.6 (0.4, 0.8) 0.8 (0.6, 1.0) 0.7
Architectural distortiona 7/182 (4%) 0.3 (0.0, 0.9) 0.1 (0.0, 0.6) 0.2
Asymmetry 21/182 (12%) 0.4 (0.2, 0.7) 0.5 (0.3, 0.7) 0.5
MRI N = 196 Positive BI-RADS 123/193 (64%) 0.7 (0.6, 0.8) 0.7 (0.6, 0.8) 0.7
Mass 99/196 (51%) 0.8 (0.7, 0.9) 0.9 (0.8, 0.9) 0.8
Cysts 16/196 (8%) 0.6 (0.4, 0.8) 1.0 (0.8, 1.0) 0.8
NME 36/196 (18%) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9
Focus 34/196 (17%) 0.7 (0.5, 0.9) 0.6 (0.4, 0.8) 0.7
US N = 195 Positive BI-RADS 55/133 (41%) 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9
Mass 34/195 (17%) 0.5 (0.4, 0.6) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.6
Cysts 47/195 (24%) 0.9 (0.7, 0.9) 0.9 (0.8, 1.0) 0.9
Architectural distortiona 5/195 (3%) 0.4 (0.1, 0.9) 0.4 (0.1, 0.9) 0.4

aExcluded from analysis