Table 3 Summary of responses to the questionnaire (restricted response categories only)
From: Computer-aided diagnosis for (123I)FP-CIT imaging: impact on clinical reporting
Question | Responses | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A lot | Moderately | A little | Not at all | Unsure | |
In general, how well did your initial reporting decisions correlate with the CADx output? | Rad1 | – | – | – | – |
Rad2 | |||||
CS1 | |||||
| Â | Substantial impact | Moderate impact | Small impact | No impact | Unsure |
In general, how would you rate the impact of the CADx algorithm on your reporting decisions? | – | Rad1 | Rad2 | – | – |
CS1 | |||||
| Â | Â | CADx | Semi-quant | Both | Unsure |
Would you prefer to have CADx for assistive DaTSCAN reporting or semi-quantification? Or Both? |  | – | – | Rad1 | – |
Rad2 | |||||
CS1 | |||||
| Â | Yes (substantial benefit) | Yes (moderate benefit) | Yes (small benefit) | No | Unsure |
Would it benefit you if the CADx system also provided information on how it came to its decision (e.g. reduced putamen uptake, high background uptake) | – | CS1 | Rad1 | – | – |
Rad2 | |||||
| Â | Substantial benefit | Moderate benefit | Small benefit | No benefit | Unsure |
To what extent would the CADx system be a useful training tool to improve DaTSCAN reporting performance for inexperienced clinicians? | Rad2 | Rad1 | – | – | CS1 |