Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke
Introduction Thrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Neuroradiology 2016-02, Vol.58 (2), p.133-139 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 139 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 133 |
container_title | Neuroradiology |
container_volume | 58 |
creator | Santos, Emilie M. M. Yoo, Albert J. Beenen, Ludo F. Berkhemer, Olvert A. den Blanken, Mark D. Wismans, Carrie Niessen, Wiro J. Majoie, Charles B. Marquering, Henk A. |
description | Introduction
Thrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non-expert observers.
Methods
For 132 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, three experts and two trained observers determined thrombus density by placing three standardized regions of interest (ROIs) in the thrombus and corresponding contralateral arterial segment. Subsequently, absolute and relative thrombus densities were determined using either one or three ROIs. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined, and Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate interobserver and intermethod agreement. Accuracy of the trained observer was evaluated with a reference expert observer using the same statistical analysis.
Results
The highest interobserver agreement was obtained for absolute thrombus measurements using three ROIs (ICCs ranging from 0.54 to 0.91). In general, interobserver agreement was lower for relative measurements, and for using one instead of three ROIs. Interobserver agreement of trained non-experts and experts was similar. Accuracy of the trained observer measurements was comparable to the expert interobserver agreement and was better for absolute measurements and with three ROIs. The agreement between the one ROI and three ROI methods was good.
Conclusion
Absolute thrombus density measurement has superior interobserver agreement compared to relative density measurement. Interobserver variation is smaller when multiple ROIs are used. Trained non-expert observers can accurately and reproducibly assess absolute thrombus densities using three ROIs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4773501</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3972547561</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-81bf6d46627c3d5e671da642fdd8c91d373a9e6c3117b4e9847e38132de4c6c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU9rFTEUxYMo9ln9AG4k4MbNaG6SSWY2ghT_QaGbdh0yyZ2-1JnJM5l5pd_eTF8tVSh0lcD93ZNzcgh5C-wjMKY_Zca4kBWDugLFdCWfkQ1IwStoOXtONmXcVKKV7Ii8yvmKMSa00C_JEVeylVLxDUlnXca0x0T3NgXbhSHMNzT21HY5DsuM1E6eJhzsHPZI522KY7dk6nHKKzmizUvCEac50zDRXeFu79dh3lLrVoWQ3RbH4GieU_yFr8mL3g4Z39ydx-Ti29fzkx_V6dn3nydfTitXazFXDXS98lIprp3wNSoN3irJe-8b14IvUWyLygkA3UlsG6lRNCC4R-mUU-KYfD7o7pZuRO-KrWQHs0thtOnGRBvMv5MpbM1l3BuptagZFIEPdwIp_l4wz2YsUXAY7IRxyQa0VqoGVfOnoIyDasVq6_1_6FVc0lR-4pZqalW3rFBwoFyKOSfs730DM2v55lC-KeWbtXwjy867h4HvN_62XQB-AHIZTZeYHjz9qOof0128bw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1770856590</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Santos, Emilie M. M. ; Yoo, Albert J. ; Beenen, Ludo F. ; Berkhemer, Olvert A. ; den Blanken, Mark D. ; Wismans, Carrie ; Niessen, Wiro J. ; Majoie, Charles B. ; Marquering, Henk A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Santos, Emilie M. M. ; Yoo, Albert J. ; Beenen, Ludo F. ; Berkhemer, Olvert A. ; den Blanken, Mark D. ; Wismans, Carrie ; Niessen, Wiro J. ; Majoie, Charles B. ; Marquering, Henk A. ; MR CLEAN investigators ; on behalf of the MR CLEAN investigators</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
Thrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non-expert observers.
Methods
For 132 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, three experts and two trained observers determined thrombus density by placing three standardized regions of interest (ROIs) in the thrombus and corresponding contralateral arterial segment. Subsequently, absolute and relative thrombus densities were determined using either one or three ROIs. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined, and Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate interobserver and intermethod agreement. Accuracy of the trained observer was evaluated with a reference expert observer using the same statistical analysis.
Results
The highest interobserver agreement was obtained for absolute thrombus measurements using three ROIs (ICCs ranging from 0.54 to 0.91). In general, interobserver agreement was lower for relative measurements, and for using one instead of three ROIs. Interobserver agreement of trained non-experts and experts was similar. Accuracy of the trained observer measurements was comparable to the expert interobserver agreement and was better for absolute measurements and with three ROIs. The agreement between the one ROI and three ROI methods was good.
Conclusion
Absolute thrombus density measurement has superior interobserver agreement compared to relative density measurement. Interobserver variation is smaller when multiple ROIs are used. Trained non-expert observers can accurately and reproducibly assess absolute thrombus densities using three ROIs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-3940</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1920</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26494462</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Absorptiometry, Photon - methods ; Acute Disease ; Aged ; Algorithms ; Blood clots ; Brain ; Cerebral Angiography - methods ; Computed Tomography Angiography - methods ; Diagnostic Neuroradiology ; Female ; Humans ; Imaging ; Intracranial Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging ; Ischemia ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Netherlands ; Neurology ; Neuroradiology ; Neurosciences ; Neurosurgery ; Observer Variation ; Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Radiology ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Stroke ; Stroke - diagnostic imaging ; Thromboembolism ; Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging ; Tomography</subject><ispartof>Neuroradiology, 2016-02, Vol.58 (2), p.133-139</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-81bf6d46627c3d5e671da642fdd8c91d373a9e6c3117b4e9847e38132de4c6c63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-81bf6d46627c3d5e671da642fdd8c91d373a9e6c3117b4e9847e38132de4c6c63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,886,27929,27930,41493,42562,51324</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26494462$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Santos, Emilie M. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoo, Albert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beenen, Ludo F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkhemer, Olvert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>den Blanken, Mark D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wismans, Carrie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niessen, Wiro J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majoie, Charles B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marquering, Henk A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MR CLEAN investigators</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the MR CLEAN investigators</creatorcontrib><title>Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke</title><title>Neuroradiology</title><addtitle>Neuroradiology</addtitle><addtitle>Neuroradiology</addtitle><description>Introduction
Thrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non-expert observers.
Methods
For 132 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, three experts and two trained observers determined thrombus density by placing three standardized regions of interest (ROIs) in the thrombus and corresponding contralateral arterial segment. Subsequently, absolute and relative thrombus densities were determined using either one or three ROIs. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined, and Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate interobserver and intermethod agreement. Accuracy of the trained observer was evaluated with a reference expert observer using the same statistical analysis.
Results
The highest interobserver agreement was obtained for absolute thrombus measurements using three ROIs (ICCs ranging from 0.54 to 0.91). In general, interobserver agreement was lower for relative measurements, and for using one instead of three ROIs. Interobserver agreement of trained non-experts and experts was similar. Accuracy of the trained observer measurements was comparable to the expert interobserver agreement and was better for absolute measurements and with three ROIs. The agreement between the one ROI and three ROI methods was good.
Conclusion
Absolute thrombus density measurement has superior interobserver agreement compared to relative density measurement. Interobserver variation is smaller when multiple ROIs are used. Trained non-expert observers can accurately and reproducibly assess absolute thrombus densities using three ROIs.</description><subject>Absorptiometry, Photon - methods</subject><subject>Acute Disease</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Blood clots</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Cerebral Angiography - methods</subject><subject>Computed Tomography Angiography - methods</subject><subject>Diagnostic Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Intracranial Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>Neurosurgery</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Stroke</subject><subject>Stroke - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Thromboembolism</subject><subject>Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><issn>0028-3940</issn><issn>1432-1920</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU9rFTEUxYMo9ln9AG4k4MbNaG6SSWY2ghT_QaGbdh0yyZ2-1JnJM5l5pd_eTF8tVSh0lcD93ZNzcgh5C-wjMKY_Zca4kBWDugLFdCWfkQ1IwStoOXtONmXcVKKV7Ii8yvmKMSa00C_JEVeylVLxDUlnXca0x0T3NgXbhSHMNzT21HY5DsuM1E6eJhzsHPZI522KY7dk6nHKKzmizUvCEac50zDRXeFu79dh3lLrVoWQ3RbH4GieU_yFr8mL3g4Z39ydx-Ti29fzkx_V6dn3nydfTitXazFXDXS98lIprp3wNSoN3irJe-8b14IvUWyLygkA3UlsG6lRNCC4R-mUU-KYfD7o7pZuRO-KrWQHs0thtOnGRBvMv5MpbM1l3BuptagZFIEPdwIp_l4wz2YsUXAY7IRxyQa0VqoGVfOnoIyDasVq6_1_6FVc0lR-4pZqalW3rFBwoFyKOSfs730DM2v55lC-KeWbtXwjy867h4HvN_62XQB-AHIZTZeYHjz9qOof0128bw</recordid><startdate>20160201</startdate><enddate>20160201</enddate><creator>Santos, Emilie M. M.</creator><creator>Yoo, Albert J.</creator><creator>Beenen, Ludo F.</creator><creator>Berkhemer, Olvert A.</creator><creator>den Blanken, Mark D.</creator><creator>Wismans, Carrie</creator><creator>Niessen, Wiro J.</creator><creator>Majoie, Charles B.</creator><creator>Marquering, Henk A.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160201</creationdate><title>Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke</title><author>Santos, Emilie M. M. ; Yoo, Albert J. ; Beenen, Ludo F. ; Berkhemer, Olvert A. ; den Blanken, Mark D. ; Wismans, Carrie ; Niessen, Wiro J. ; Majoie, Charles B. ; Marquering, Henk A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-81bf6d46627c3d5e671da642fdd8c91d373a9e6c3117b4e9847e38132de4c6c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Absorptiometry, Photon - methods</topic><topic>Acute Disease</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Blood clots</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Cerebral Angiography - methods</topic><topic>Computed Tomography Angiography - methods</topic><topic>Diagnostic Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Intracranial Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>Neurosurgery</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Stroke</topic><topic>Stroke - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Thromboembolism</topic><topic>Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Santos, Emilie M. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoo, Albert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beenen, Ludo F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkhemer, Olvert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>den Blanken, Mark D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wismans, Carrie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niessen, Wiro J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majoie, Charles B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marquering, Henk A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MR CLEAN investigators</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the MR CLEAN investigators</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Proquest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Neuroradiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Santos, Emilie M. M.</au><au>Yoo, Albert J.</au><au>Beenen, Ludo F.</au><au>Berkhemer, Olvert A.</au><au>den Blanken, Mark D.</au><au>Wismans, Carrie</au><au>Niessen, Wiro J.</au><au>Majoie, Charles B.</au><au>Marquering, Henk A.</au><aucorp>MR CLEAN investigators</aucorp><aucorp>on behalf of the MR CLEAN investigators</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke</atitle><jtitle>Neuroradiology</jtitle><stitle>Neuroradiology</stitle><addtitle>Neuroradiology</addtitle><date>2016-02-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>58</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>133</spage><epage>139</epage><pages>133-139</pages><issn>0028-3940</issn><eissn>1432-1920</eissn><abstract>Introduction
Thrombus density may be a predictor for acute ischemic stroke treatment success. However, only limited data on observer variability for thrombus density measurements exist. This study assesses the variability and bias of four common thrombus density measurement methods by expert and non-expert observers.
Methods
For 132 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, three experts and two trained observers determined thrombus density by placing three standardized regions of interest (ROIs) in the thrombus and corresponding contralateral arterial segment. Subsequently, absolute and relative thrombus densities were determined using either one or three ROIs. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined, and Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate interobserver and intermethod agreement. Accuracy of the trained observer was evaluated with a reference expert observer using the same statistical analysis.
Results
The highest interobserver agreement was obtained for absolute thrombus measurements using three ROIs (ICCs ranging from 0.54 to 0.91). In general, interobserver agreement was lower for relative measurements, and for using one instead of three ROIs. Interobserver agreement of trained non-experts and experts was similar. Accuracy of the trained observer measurements was comparable to the expert interobserver agreement and was better for absolute measurements and with three ROIs. The agreement between the one ROI and three ROI methods was good.
Conclusion
Absolute thrombus density measurement has superior interobserver agreement compared to relative density measurement. Interobserver variation is smaller when multiple ROIs are used. Trained non-expert observers can accurately and reproducibly assess absolute thrombus densities using three ROIs.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>26494462</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0028-3940 |
ispartof | Neuroradiology, 2016-02, Vol.58 (2), p.133-139 |
issn | 0028-3940 1432-1920 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4773501 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Absorptiometry, Photon - methods Acute Disease Aged Algorithms Blood clots Brain Cerebral Angiography - methods Computed Tomography Angiography - methods Diagnostic Neuroradiology Female Humans Imaging Intracranial Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging Ischemia Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Netherlands Neurology Neuroradiology Neurosciences Neurosurgery Observer Variation Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiology Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Stroke Stroke - diagnostic imaging Thromboembolism Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging Tomography |
title | Observer variability of absolute and relative thrombus density measurements in patients with acute ischemic stroke |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T10%3A11%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Observer%20variability%20of%20absolute%20and%20relative%20thrombus%20density%20measurements%20in%20patients%20with%20acute%20ischemic%20stroke&rft.jtitle=Neuroradiology&rft.au=Santos,%20Emilie%20M.%20M.&rft.aucorp=MR%20CLEAN%20investigators&rft.date=2016-02-01&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=133&rft.epage=139&rft.pages=133-139&rft.issn=0028-3940&rft.eissn=1432-1920&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00234-015-1607-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3972547561%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1770856590&rft_id=info:pmid/26494462&rfr_iscdi=true |