Skip to main content

Table 3 Diagnostic performance of the six readers and the AI system alone for the same set of vessels

From: Artificial intelligence stenosis diagnosis in coronary CTA: effect on the performance and consistency of readers with less cardiovascular experience

Reader

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

PPV (%)

NPV (%)

Accuracy (%)

AI

78.1 (72.1, 83.3)

82.5 (79.0, 85.7)

65.9

89.7

84.5 (81.7, 87.0)

Reader 1

53.2 (46.4, 59.9)

89.2 (86.2, 91.7)

67.8

81.7

82.5 (79.6, 85.2)

Reader 2

61.2 (54.6, 67.6)

78.3 (74.6, 81.8)

54.9

82.7

79.5 (76.4, 82.3)

Reader 3

67.1 (60.6, 73.2)

83.2 (79.8, 86.3)

63.5

85.4

83.3 (80.4, 85.9)

Reader 4

69.3 (62.9, 75.2)

81.3 (77.7, 84.5)

61.7

85.9

81.3 (78.4, 84.1)

Reader 5

50.9 (44.2, 57.6)

93.1 (90.5, 95.1)

76.2

81.3

84.7 (81.9, 87.2)

Reader 6

64.2 (57.5, 70.4)

89.8 (86.9, 92.3)

73.2

85.2

85.0 (82.2, 87.5)

  1. Data in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals
  2. AI artificial intelligence, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value