Literature DB >> 28491908

Lack of agreement between radiologists: implications for image-based model observers.

Juhun Lee1, Robert M Nishikawa1, Ingrid Reiser2, Margarita L Zuley1, John M Boone3.   

Abstract

We tested the agreement of radiologists' rankings of different reconstructions of breast computed tomography images based on their diagnostic (classification) performance and on their subjective image quality assessments. We used 102 pathology proven cases (62 malignant, 40 benign), and an iterative image reconstruction (IIR) algorithm to obtain 24 reconstructions per case with different image appearances. Using image feature analysis, we selected 3 IIRs and 1 clinical reconstruction and 50 lesions. The reconstructions produced a range of image quality from smooth/low-noise to sharp/high-noise, which had a range in classifier performance corresponding to AUCs of 0.62 to 0.96. Six experienced Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) radiologists rated the likelihood of malignancy for each lesion. We conducted an additional reader study with the same radiologists and a subset of 30 lesions. Radiologists ranked each reconstruction according to their preference. There was disagreement among the six radiologists on which reconstruction produced images with the highest diagnostic content, but they preferred the midsharp/noise image appearance over the others. However, the reconstruction they preferred most did not match with their performance. Due to these disagreements, it may be difficult to develop a single image-based model observer that is representative of a population of radiologists for this particular imaging task.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; breast computed tomography; diagnostic performance; model observers; reader study

Year:  2017        PMID: 28491908      PMCID: PMC5414890          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.4.2.025502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)        ISSN: 2329-4302


  39 in total

1.  Automated detection of mass lesions in dedicated breast CT: a preliminary study.

Authors:  I Reiser; R M Nishikawa; M L Giger; J M Boone; K K Lindfors; K Yang
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Impact of lesion segmentation metrics on computer-aided diagnosis/detection in breast computed tomography.

Authors:  Hsien-Chi Kuo; Maryellen L Giger; Ingrid Reiser; Karen Drukker; John M Boone; Karen K Lindfors; Kai Yang; Alexandra Edwards
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-12-24

Review 3.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Weijie Chen; Maryellen L Giger; Hui Li; Ulrich Bick; Gillian M Newstead
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 4.668

5.  ACRIN CT colonography trial: does reader's preference for primary two-dimensional versus primary three-dimensional interpretation affect performance?

Authors:  Amy K Hara; Meridith Blevins; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Abraham H Dachman; Mark D Kuo; Christine O Menias; Bettina Siewert; Jugesh I Cheema; Richard G Obregon; Jeff L Fidler; Peter Zimmerman; Karen M Horton; Kevin J Coakley; Revathy B Iyer; Robert A Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; Judy Yee; Benjamin A Herman; C Daniel Johnson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  The effect of nonlinear human visual system components on performance of a channelized Hotelling observer in structured backgrounds.

Authors:  Yani Zhang; Binh T Pham; Miguel P Eckstein
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 7.  Dedicated breast computed tomography: the optimal cross-sectional imaging solution?

Authors:  Karen K Lindfors; John M Boone; Mary S Newell; Carl J D'Orsi
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.303

8.  One-mSv CT colonography: Effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on radiologists' performance.

Authors:  Cheong-Il Shin; Se Hyung Kim; Jong Pil Im; Sang Gyun Kim; Mi Hye Yu; Eun Sun Lee; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 3.528

9.  Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Sara L Jackson; Linn Abraham; Diana L Miglioretti; Patricia A Carney; Berta M Geller; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Karla Kerlikowske; Tracy Onega; Robert D Rosenberg; Edward A Sickles; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Numerical Surrogates for Human Observers in Myocardial Motion Evaluation From SPECT Images.

Authors:  Thibault Marin; Mahdi M Kalayeh; Felipe M Parages; Jovan G Brankov
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2013-08-22       Impact factor: 10.048

View more
  1 in total

1.  Relationship between computer segmentation performance and computer classification performance in breast CT: A simulation study using RGI segmentation and LDA classification.

Authors:  Juhun Lee; Robert M Nishikawa; Ingrid Reiser; John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 4.071

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.