Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

AI-quantified Myosteatosis at CAC CT for Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging·2026
Same author

AI-CVD-HF: A heart failure risk prediction model based on coronary artery calcium scans compared with PREVENT-HF.

American journal of preventive cardiology·2026
Same author

AI-Derived LA Volume Index, LA/RA and LA/LV Volume Ratios From Coronary Artery Calcium Scans Predict Long-Term Atrial Fibrillation and Stroke.

Stroke·2026
Same author

Biological, Radiological, and Clinical Significance of Spotty Calcification in Coronary Artery Disease: A State-of-the-Art Review.

JACC. Cardiovascular imaging·2026
Same author

Impact of Imaging Acquisition and Protocol Variability on Artificial Intelligence Model Performance: A Secondary Analysis of the ASFNR Artificial Intelligence Competition.

AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology·2026
Same author

Multi-omics data integration from patients with carotid stenosis illuminates key molecular signatures of atherosclerotic instability.

Genome medicine·2026
Same journal

A joint model for a longitudinal outcome and a progressive multistate model under a mixed observation scheme.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Efficient semi-supervised estimation of optimal individualized treatment regimes with survival outcome.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Asymptotic online FWER control for dependent test statistics.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Regression analysis of misclassified current status data with potentially unknown test accuracy.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Bayesian multivariate linear mixed-effects models with varied association structures.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Inference about the ratio of age-standardized rates between two overlapping populations.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 28, 2026

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer IBEX for Radiomics
10:17

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer IBEX for Radiomics

Published on: January 8, 2018

12.8K

Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for computer algorithm comparisons.

Nancy A Obuchowski1, Anthony P Reeves2, Erich P Huang3

  • 1Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA obuchon@ccf.org.

Statistical Methods in Medical Research
|June 13, 2014
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a framework for comparing quantitative imaging biomarker (QIB) algorithms. It reviews study designs and statistical methods to ensure reliable QIB measurement validation for clinical use.

Keywords:
agreementbiasimage metricsimaging biomarkersprecisionquantitative imagingrepeatabilityreproducibility

More Related Videos

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model
07:15

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model

Published on: August 16, 2020

5.8K
Using Computer-based Image Analysis to Improve Quantification of Lung Metastasis in the 4T1 Breast Cancer Model
08:32

Using Computer-based Image Analysis to Improve Quantification of Lung Metastasis in the 4T1 Breast Cancer Model

Published on: October 2, 2020

5.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2026

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer IBEX for Radiomics
10:17

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer IBEX for Radiomics

Published on: January 8, 2018

12.8K
Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model
07:15

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model

Published on: August 16, 2020

5.8K
Using Computer-based Image Analysis to Improve Quantification of Lung Metastasis in the 4T1 Breast Cancer Model
08:32

Using Computer-based Image Analysis to Improve Quantification of Lung Metastasis in the 4T1 Breast Cancer Model

Published on: October 2, 2020

5.5K

Area of Science:

  • Medical Imaging
  • Biomarker Discovery
  • Computational Pathology

Background:

  • Quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are crucial for clinical applications like diagnosis and treatment planning.
  • Validation and comparison of algorithms used for QIB measurements have received insufficient attention.
  • Standardized methods are needed to ensure the reliability of QIB algorithms.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide a comprehensive framework for comparing quantitative imaging biomarker algorithms.
  • To review and compare various study designs for algorithm validation.
  • To present statistical methods for QIB algorithm comparison.

Main Methods:

  • Review and comparison of study designs: with true value (phantoms, digital reference images), with reference standard, and without reference standard (agreement, precision).
  • Presentation of statistical methods for comparing QIB algorithms using aggregate and disaggregate approaches.
  • Proposal of steps for establishing QIB algorithm performance.

Main Results:

  • Categorization of study designs for QIB algorithm validation.
  • Detailed statistical methodologies for comparing QIB algorithms across different study types.
  • Identification of limitations in current statistical literature for QIB algorithm evaluation.

Conclusions:

  • A structured framework is proposed for the validation and comparison of QIB algorithms.
  • The study highlights the need for rigorous statistical methods in QIB algorithm development.
  • Future research directions are suggested to advance the field of quantitative imaging biomarker analysis.