medical-imaging-2016_keynote

6 / 6

Volume 5, Issue 5(Suppl) OMICS J Radiol
ISSN: 2167-7964 ROA, an open access journal
Page 36
Medical Imaging 2016
October 20-21, 2016
conferenceseries.com
October 20-21, 2016 Chicago, USA
International Conference on
Medical Imaging & Diagnosis
Michael L Goris, OMICS J Radiol 2016, 6:5(Suppl)
8
Clinical validation of diagnostic imaging procedures
When new imaging is introduced in clinical settings, little is known about their potential to improve care. Acceptance is
mostly based on how well structures can be seen on the images. True clinical validations are perceived as time expensive
and di cult to fund. In this paper we look for alternatives. e de ning diagnosis (e.g. by histology, microbiology) is a type
of taxonomy, but is that taxonomy related to outcome? e validation of de ning diagnostic technique is solipsistic. We will
look at: Outcome analysis: Since imaging represents only a few steps in a chain of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions,
it is di cult to ascribe the outcome to any speci c link. e performance of an imaging test may be excellent, but there may
still be adverse outcomes; outcomes evaluations of imaging are rare. Predictive power: A taxonomic exact diagnosis may not
be predictive. If the median survival time is n years: 50% percent die earlier, 50% later. Staging re nes the prognosis, or the
expected response to a particular therapy. Imaging can predict if therapy will fail or succeed. Predicting taxonomy: e most
relevant aspect of this approach is that at some point there has to be a de ning test. Or that a ground truth is assumed to be
known. e major problem is veri cation bias in the rst case. ere are ways to overcome is veri cation bias. Discriminating
power: It is the ability to distinguish between closely related populations in all aspects except the actual disease. Equivalence: It
is based on the (false) assumption that a gold standard re ects the ground truth. e result is the inability to show diagnostic
superiority (no worse than). In conclusion, there are approaches to evaluate diagnostic imaging, which are both valid and not
too expensive.
Biography
Michael L Goris has a Medical degree from the University of Leuven in Belgium and a PhD degree in Medical Physics from UC Berkeley. He has been a Professor
in the Stanford Medical School and is Emeritus since 2012 and served as a Chairman for University panel on Radiation safety during 2003-2010. He has more
than 120 publications in peer reviewed journals. His research interests are radio-immunotherapy, medical imaging processing and quantification for diagnosis of
clinical validations.
Michael L Goris
Stanford University School of Medicine, USA