Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Regression models for analyzing radiological visual grading studies - an empirical comparison
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Medical Engineering, Medical Image Processing and Visualization. Linköping University, Sweden. (BILDBEHANDL OCH VISUALISERING)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7750-1917
2015 (English)In: BMC Medical Imaging, ISSN 1471-2342, E-ISSN 1471-2342, Vol. 15, 49Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: For optimizing and evaluating image quality in medical imaging, one can use visual grading experiments, where observers rate some aspect of image quality on an ordinal scale. To analyze the grading data, several regression methods are available, and this study aimed at empirically comparing such techniques, in particular when including random effects in the models, which is appropriate for observers and patients. Methods: Data were taken from a previous study where 6 observers graded or ranked in 40 patients the image quality of four imaging protocols, differing in radiation dose and image reconstruction method. The models tested included linear regression, the proportional odds model for ordinal logistic regression, the partial proportional odds model, the stereotype logistic regression model and rank-order logistic regression (for ranking data). In the first two models, random effects as well as fixed effects could be included; in the remaining three, only fixed effects. Results: In general, the goodness of fit (AIC and McFadden's Pseudo R-2) showed small differences between the models with fixed effects only. For the mixed-effects models, higher AIC and lower Pseudo R-2 was obtained, which may be related to the different number of parameters in these models. The estimated potential for dose reduction by new image reconstruction methods varied only slightly between models. Conclusions: The authors suggest that the most suitable approach may be to use ordinal logistic regression, which can handle ordinal data and random effects appropriately.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central, 2015. Vol. 15, 49
Keyword [en]
Image quality, Visual grading, Ordinal data, Regression models, Fixed effects, Random effects
National Category
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-177951DOI: 10.1186/s12880-015-0083-yISI: 000363921400001PubMedID: 26515510Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84945565694OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-177951DiVA: diva2:876364
Note

QC 20151203. QC 20160113

Available from: 2015-12-03 Created: 2015-11-30 Last updated: 2017-12-01Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Smedby, Örjan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Smedby, Örjan
By organisation
Medical Image Processing and Visualization
In the same journal
BMC Medical Imaging
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 23 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf