Literature DB >> 21248231

The effect of abnormality-prevalence expectation on expert observer performance and visual search.

Warren M Reed1, John T Ryan, Mark F McEntee, Michael G Evanoff, Patrick C Brennan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To measure the effect of abnormality-prevalence expectation on experienced radiologists' performance during pulmonary nodular lesion detection on a chest radiograph.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multiobserver receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and eye-position analysis study was performed to assess the effect of prevalence expectation on observer performance. Twenty-two experienced radiologists were divided into three groups and each was asked to interpret 30 (15 abnormal) identical posteroanterior chest images twice and decide if pulmonary lesions were present. Before each viewing, the radiologists were told that the images contained a specific number of abnormal images: group 1: 9 and 15; group 2: 15 and 22; and group 3: 15 and not told.
RESULTS: ROC analysis demonstrated that no significant effect could be measured as a function of prevalence expectation (P > .05). However, eye-position analysis showed significant increases in eye movements at higher prevalence expectation rates in terms of the number of fixations per image (group 1: P = .0001; group 2: P = .0001; group 3: P = .001) and the total scrutiny time of each image (group 1: P = .0001; group 2: P = .0283; group 3: P = .028).
CONCLUSION: Overall, findings of this study showed no evidence that the accuracy of expert radiologists is altered due to changing prevalence expectation rates. However, the time spent interpreting each image and the number of fixations increased at higher prevalence rates. Maintenance of diagnostic efficacy has been shown even when circumstances challenge normal observer behavior. © RSNA, 2011.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21248231     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10101090

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  22 in total

1.  The effects of local prevalence and explicit expectations on search termination times.

Authors:  Kazuya Ishibashi; Shinichi Kita; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Anatomical and/or pathological predictors for the "incorrect" classification of red dot markers on wrist radiographs taken following trauma.

Authors:  R Kranz; P Cosson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Intercountry analysis of breast density classification using visual grading.

Authors:  Christine N Damases; Peter Hogg; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Screening mammography: test set data can reasonably describe actual clinical reporting.

Authors:  BaoLin P Soh; Warwick Lee; Mark F McEntee; Peter L Kench; Warren M Reed; Rob Heard; Dev P Chakraborty; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  The effects of increasing target prevalence on information processing during visual search.

Authors:  Hayward J Godwin; Tamaryn Menneer; Kyle R Cave; Michael Thaibsyah; Nick Donnelly
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-04

Review 6.  Review of prospects and challenges of eye tracking in volumetric imaging.

Authors:  Antje C Venjakob; Claudia R Mello-Thoms
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-09-29

7.  Does Expectation of Abnormality Affect the Search Pattern of Radiologists When Looking for Pulmonary Nodules?

Authors:  Stephen Littlefair; Patrick Brennan; Warren Reed; Claudia Mello-Thoms
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Assessing the effect of a true-positive recall case in screening mammography: does perceptual priming alter radiologists' performance?

Authors:  S J Lewis; C R Mello-Thoms; P C Brennan; W Lee; A Tan; M F McEntee; M Evanoff; M Pietrzyk; W M Reed
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Failures of perception in the low-prevalence effect: Evidence from active and passive visual search.

Authors:  Michael C Hout; Stephen C Walenchok; Stephen D Goldinger; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Do prevalence expectations affect patterns of visual search and decision-making in interpreting CT colonography endoluminal videos?

Authors:  Thomas R Fanshawe; Peter Phillips; Andrew Plumb; Emma Helbren; Steve Halligan; Stuart A Taylor; Alastair Gale; Susan Mallett
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.