Literature DB >> 12890245

Radiologists' detection of mammographic abnormalities with and without a computer-aided detection system.

S T Quek1, C H Thng, J B K Khoo, W L Koh.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to to evaluate the role of a computer-aided program (CAD) in assisting detection of mammographic lesions by radiologists not specifically trained in mammography and its potential utility in breast screening. Mammograms were evaluated by radiologists not specifically trained in mammography first without, and then with, the CAD. Finally, the mammograms were evaluated by experienced mammographers who formed the reference standard. Two hundred and ninety four breasts were studied. In 257 breasts (87.4%), the CAD system did not help with the detection of abnormalities. It assisted radiologists in detecting abnormalities in 21 breasts (7.1%) with potential for detecting abnormalities in a further 13 breasts (4.4%). Only in three cases (1%) did it cause confusion in interpretation. There is overall increased sensitivity in detecting mammographic abnormalities with the aid of the CAD system from 74.4 to 87.2%, which is statistically significant. However, it failed to detect suspicious abnormalities in 71 breasts (24.1%). The CAD system improved detection of suspicious mammographic abnormalities by radiologists who are not specifically trained in mammography. However, there is also a substantial failure to detect suspicious mammographic features that cautions against over-reliance on the system, emphasizing its role as a second reader at best.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12890245     DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1673.2003.01173.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Australas Radiol        ISSN: 0004-8461


  4 in total

Review 1.  Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators.

Authors:  Kate Goddard; Abdul Roudsari; Jeremy C Wyatt
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Effect of breast density on computer aided detection.

Authors:  Ansgar Malich; Dorothee R Fischer; Mirjam Facius; Alexander Petrovitch; Joachim Boettcher; Christiane Marx; Andreas Hansch; Werner A Kaiser
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 3.  Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review.

Authors:  Edward Azavedo; Sophia Zackrisson; Ingegerd Mejàre; Marianne Heibert Arnlind
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 1.930

4.  Who could benefit the most from using a computer-aided detection system in full-field digital mammography?

Authors:  Na Young Jung; Bong Joo Kang; Hyeon Sook Kim; Eun Suk Cha; Jae Hee Lee; Chang Suk Park; In Young Whang; Sung Hun Kim; Yeong Yi An; Jae Jeong Choi
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 2.754

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.