References
- Brown J. J., Malchow S. C., Totty W. G., et al. MR examination of the knee. Interpretation with multiscreen digital workstation vs hardcopy format. AJR 1991; 157: 81
- Hayrapetian A., Aberle D. R., Huang H. K., et al. Comparison of 2 048-line digital display formats and conventional radiographs. An ROC study. AJR 1989; 152: 1113
- Kehler M., Albrechtsson U., Andrésdóttir A., et al. Efficacy of inverted digital luminescence radiography in evaluating chest neoplasms. Acta Radiol 1991; 32: 442
- Kersting-Sommerhoff B. A., Higgins C. B., White R. D., Sommerhoff C. P., Lipton M. J. Aortic dissection. Sensitivity and specificity of MR imaging. Radiology 1988; 166: 651
- Metz C. E. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin. Nucl. Med 1978; 8: 283
- Siegel E. L., Cook L. T., Parsa M. B. Conventional screen/film vs reduced exposure photostimulable phosphor plate imaging in lower extremity venography. An ROC analysis. AJR 1991; 156: 1095
- Slasky B. S., Gur D., Good W. F., et al. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images. Radiology 1990; 174: 775
- Straub W. H., Gur D., Good W. F., et al. Primary CT diagnosis of abdominal masses in a PACS environment. Radiology 1991; 178: 739