Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Aug 1;21(8):880-886.
doi: 10.5588/ijtld.16.0851.

Automatic versus human reading of chest X-rays in the Zambia National Tuberculosis Prevalence Survey

J Melendez  1 , R H H M Philipsen  1 , P Chanda-Kapata  2 , V Sunkutu  3 , N Kapata  2 , B van Ginneken  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Automatic versus human reading of chest X-rays in the Zambia National Tuberculosis Prevalence Survey

J Melendez et al. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. .

Abstract

Setting: Tuberculosis (TB) prevalence survey in Zambia between 2013 and 2014.

Objective: To compare the performance of automatic software (CAD4TB 5) in chest X-ray (CXR) reading with that of field (general practitioners) and central (radiologists) readers.

Design: A retrospective study comparing the performance of human and automatic reading was conducted. Two scenarios for central reading were evaluated: abnormalities not consistent with TB were considered to be 'normal' or 'abnormal'. Sputum culture was defined as the reference standard. Measures derived from receiver operating characteristic analysis were used to assess readers' performances.

Results: Of 46 099 participants, 23 838 cases included all survey information; of these, 106 cases were culture-confirmed TB-positive. The performance of CAD4TB 5 was similar to that of field and central readers. Although there were significant differences in specificity when compared with field readings (P = 0.002) and central readings considering the first scenario (P < 0.001), these differences were not substantial (93.2% vs. 92.6% and 98.4% vs. 99.6%, respectively).CONCLUSIONp: The performance of automatic CXR readings is comparable with that of human experts in a TB prevalence survey setting using culture as reference.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources