Skip to main content
. 2014 Oct;35(10):1897–1902. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3996

Table 2:

Estimated figure of merit by reader and methoda

Estimated FOM
CAD− CAD+ Difference 95% CI P Value
Reader 1 0.667 0.726 0.060 (−0.184–0.304) .62
Reader 2 0.660 0.842 0.182 (0.021–0.344) .028
Reader 3 0.789 0.892 0.103 (−0.071–0.276) .24
Reader 4b 0.594 0.746 0.152 (−0.042–0.347) .12
Reader 5 0.514 0.717 0.203 (−0.158–0.564) .26
Reader 6 0.707 0.630 -0.077 (−0.371–0.217) .60
Overall 0.655 0.759 0.104 (0.025–0.183) .011
a

For all except reader 6, there was a definite increase in the FOM when CAD results were available, though the difference was statistically significant for only 1 reader (reader 2).

b

General radiologist; all other readers are neuroradiologists.