A constrained formulation for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve based on probability summation.

We propose a principled formulation of the ROC curve that is constrained in a realistic way by the mechanism of probability summation. The constrained and conventional ROC formulations were fitted to 150 separate sets of rating data taken from previous observer studies of 250 or 529 chest radiographs. A total of 20 different readers had used either discrete or continuous rating scales to evaluate those chest cases for likelihood of separate specified abnormalities: interstitial disease, pulmonary nodule, pneumothorax, alveolar infiltrate, or rib fracture. Both ROC formulations were fitted separately to every set of rating data using maximum-likelihood statistical procedures that specified each ROC curve by normally distributed latent variables with two scaling parameters, and estimated the area below the ROC curve (Az) with its standard error. The conventional and constrained binormal formulations usually fitted ROC curves that were nearly indistinguishable in form and in Az. But when fitted to asymmetric rating data that contained few false-positive cases, the conventional ROC curves often rose steeply, then flattened and extrapolated into an unrealistic upward "hook" at the higher false-positive rates. For those sets of rating data, the constrained ROC curves (without hooks) estimated larger values for Az with smaller standard errors. The constrained ROC formulation describes observers' ratings of cases at least as well as the conventional ROC, and always guarantees a realistic fitted curve for observer performance. Its estimated parameters are easy to interpret, and may also be used to predict observer accuracy in localizing the image abnormalities.

[1]  J. C. Ogilvie,et al.  Maximum-likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic curve parameters , 1968 .

[2]  K S Berbaum,et al.  A contaminated binormal model for ROC data: Part III. Initial evaluation with detection ROC data. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[3]  H E Rockette,et al.  The use of continuous and discrete confidence judgments in receiver operating characteristic studies of diagnostic imaging techniques. , 1992, Investigative radiology.

[4]  Jill L. King,et al.  Observer performance assessment of JPEG-compressed high-resolution chest images , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[5]  C E Metz,et al.  The "proper" binormal model: parametric receiver operating characteristic curve estimation with degenerate data. , 1997, Academic radiology.

[6]  D. Chakraborty,et al.  Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. , 1990, Radiology.

[7]  D P Chakraborty,et al.  Maximum likelihood analysis of free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) data. , 1989, Medical physics.

[8]  R. Swensson,et al.  Analysis of rating data from multiple-alternative tasks☆ , 1989 .

[9]  Kevin S. Berbaum,et al.  Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology. , 1989 .

[10]  D. Dorfman,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory—A direct solution , 1968, Psychometrika.

[11]  K S Berbaum,et al.  A contaminated binormal model for ROC data: Part II. A formal model. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[12]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[13]  H E Rockette,et al.  Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images. , 1990, Radiology.

[14]  C. Metz ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging , 1986, Investigative radiology.

[15]  Byron J. T. Morgan,et al.  Some aspects of ROC curve-fitting: Normal and logistic models , 1972 .

[16]  K. Berbaum,et al.  Proper receiver operating characteristic analysis: the bigamma model. , 1997, Academic radiology.

[17]  J SWETS,et al.  Decision processes in perception. , 1961, Psychological review.

[18]  C. Metz,et al.  "Proper" Binormal ROC Curves: Theory and Maximum-Likelihood Estimation. , 1999, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[19]  H E Rockette,et al.  Nonparametric estimation of degenerate ROC data sets used for comparison of imaging systems. , 1990, Investigative radiology.

[20]  C. Metz,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[21]  H E Rockette,et al.  On the validity of the continuous and discrete confidence rating scales in receiver operating characteristic studies. , 1993, Investigative radiology.

[22]  R. Swensson Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. , 1996, Medical physics.

[23]  D Gur,et al.  Observer variation and the performance accuracy gained by averaging ratings of abnormality. , 2000, Medical physics.

[24]  Jill L. King,et al.  Using incomplete and imprecise localization data on images to improve estimates of detection accuracy , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[25]  K S Berbaum,et al.  Degeneracy and discrete receiver operating characteristic rating data. , 1995, Academic radiology.

[26]  D. Dorfman,et al.  Maximum-likelihood estimation of parameters of signal-detection theory and determination of confidence intervals—Rating-method data , 1969 .

[27]  C E Metz,et al.  Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies. , 1989, Investigative radiology.

[28]  R G Swensson,et al.  Using Localization Data from Image Interpretations to Improve Estimates of Performance Accuracy , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[29]  John F. Hamilton,et al.  A Free Response Approach To The Measurement And Characterization Of Radiographic Observer Performance , 1977, Other Conferences.

[30]  H E Rockette,et al.  Effects of luminance and resolution on observer performance with chest radiographs. , 2000, Radiology.