Abstract
The original version of this article contained an error in the usage of the term "false positive rate". The intention of the authors in those instances was simply to compare the absolute percentage of false positive results in the study vs the NLST, not to make any observations about false positive rate in the strict statistical sense (i.e. Type I error probability).
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
