Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A computed radiographic system for generating digital film images was evaluated in the performance of excretory urography. Three experienced radiologists reviewed digital and conventional screen-film urograms for 100 patients in a prospective study to evaluate the clinical utility of the digital system. Results indicate no difference between digital and screen-film urograms in diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, or receiver-operating-characteristic curves for differentiating normal from abnormal studies. Readers' performances in making specific diagnoses were also the same with both techniques.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fajardo et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: