Disagreements between reviewers for features in OCT scans.

<p>(L) disagreements in reason for bad quality (R) disagreements in presence of hyperreflective material.</p>

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Katherine Du (20448297) (author)
Other Authors:	Stavan Shah (20448300) (author), Sandeep Chandra Bollepalli (20448303) (author), Mohammed Nasar Ibrahim (20448306) (author), Adarsh Gadari (20448309) (author), Shan Sutharahan (20448312) (author), José-Alain Sahel (19376) (author), Jay Chhablani (561257) (author), Kiran Kumar Vupparaboina (4919440) (author)
Published:	2024
Subjects:	Biochemistry Medicine Cell Biology Neuroscience Biotechnology Mental Health Virology Space Science reviewers (&# 954 pigment epithelial detachment patient &# 8217 optical coherence tomography house annotation software cohen &# 8217 diagnosing retinal diseases 16 random scans raw percentage agreement irf ), drusen indicating substantial agreement defining disease progression common imaging signatures 78 ), irf 63 ), drusen specific retinal pathologies oct 5000 devices specific pathological features retinal oct scans overall scan quality retinal pathologies oct scans pathological features imaging features slight agreement less agreement disease classification 73 ), 41 ), xlink "> two sets study aims standardized labels rater reliability ped ), medical diagnoses hyperreflective material hyperreflective foci foveal location evaluate concurrence cirrus hd binary determination 85 ). 512x1024x128 resolution 18 ).
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Similar Items