Literature DB >> 31287719

Visual search in breast imaging.

Ziba Gandomkar1, Claudia Mello-Thoms2.   

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among females worldwide and large volumes of breast images are produced and interpreted annually. As long as radiologists interpret these images, the diagnostic accuracy will be limited by human factors and both false-positive and false-negative errors might occur. By understanding visual search in breast images, we may be able to identify causes of diagnostic errors, find ways to reduce them, and also provide a better education to radiology residents. Many visual search studies in breast radiology have been devoted to mammography. These studies showed that 70% of missed lesions on mammograms attract radiologists' visual attention and that a plethora of different reasons, such as satisfaction of search, incorrect background sampling, and incorrect first impression can cause diagnostic errors in the interpretation of mammograms. Recently, highly accurate tools, which rely on both eye-tracking data and the content of the mammogram, have been proposed to provide feedback to the radiologists. Improving these tools and determining the optimal pathway to integrate them in the radiology workflow could be a possible line of future research. Moreover, in the past few years deep learning has led to improving diagnostic accuracy of computerized diagnostic tools and visual search studies will be required to understand how radiologists interact with the prompts from these tools, and to identify the best way to utilize them. Visual search in other breast imaging modalities, such as breast ultrasound and digital breast tomosynthesis, have so far received less attention, probably due to associated complexities of eye-tracking monitoring and analysing the data. For example, in digital breast tomosynthesis, scrolling through the image results in longer trials, adds a new factor to the study's complexity and makes calculation of gaze parameters more difficult. However, considering the wide utilization of three-dimensional imaging modalities, more visual search studies involving reading stack-view examinations are required in the future. To conclude, in the past few decades visual search studies provided extensive understanding about underlying reasons for diagnostic errors in breast radiology and characterized differences between experts' and novices' visual search patterns. Further visual search studies are required to investigate radiologists' interaction with relatively newer imaging modalities and artificial intelligence tools.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31287719      PMCID: PMC6774588          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  60 in total

1.  Methods for comparing scanpaths and saliency maps: strengths and weaknesses.

Authors:  Olivier Le Meur; Thierry Baccino
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2013-03

2.  Can eye-tracking metrics be used to better pair radiologists in a mammogram reading task?

Authors:  Ziba Gandomkar; Kevin Tay; Patrick C Brennan; Emma Kozuch; Claudia Mello-Thoms
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology.

Authors:  K S Berbaum; E A Franken; D D Dorfman; S A Rooholamini; M H Kathol; T J Barloon; F M Behlke; Y Sato; C H Lu; G Y el-Khoury
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 6.016

4.  Generalized "satisfaction of search": adverse influences on dual-target search accuracy.

Authors:  Mathias S Fleck; Ehsan Samei; Stephen R Mitroff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2010-03

5.  Comparing search patterns in digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography: an eye tracking study.

Authors:  Avi Aizenman; Trafton Drew; Krista A Ehinger; Dianne Georgian-Smith; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-10-27

6.  Comparison scans while reading chest images. Taught, but not practiced.

Authors:  D P Carmody; H L Kundel; L C Toto
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1984 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 6.016

7.  Visual search of mammographic images: influence of lesion subtlety.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Mechanism of satisfaction of search: eye position recordings in the reading of chest radiographs.

Authors:  S Samuel; H L Kundel; C F Nodine; L C Toto
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Visual search of experts in medical image reading: the effect of training, target prevalence, and expert knowledge.

Authors:  Ryoichi Nakashima; Kazufumi Kobayashi; Eriko Maeda; Takeharu Yoshikawa; Kazuhiko Yokosawa
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-04-05

Review 10.  Errors in Mammography Cannot be Solved Through Technology Alone

Authors:  Ernest Usang Ekpo; Maram Alakhras; Patrick Brennan
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2018-02-26
View more
  7 in total

1.  What eye tracking can tell us about how radiologists use automated breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Wanyi Lyu; Jeffrey Dong; Chia-Chien Wu
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2022-07-26

2.  Soluble POSTN is a novel biomarker complementing CA153 and CEA for breast cancer diagnosis and metastasis prediction.

Authors:  Li Jia; Guanhua Li; Na Ma; Aimin Zhang; Yunli Zhou; Li Ren; Dong Dong
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-07-12       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  What do experts look at and what do experts find when reading mammograms?

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Chia-Chien Wu; Jonathan Li; Sneha B Suresh
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-07-13

4.  Predictive value of ultrasound imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions taking biopsy results as the standard.

Authors:  Abdulkhaleq A Binnuhaid; Sultan Abdulwadoud Alshoabi; Fahad H Alhazmi; Tareef S Daqqaq; Suliman G Salih; Sami A Al-Dubai
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2019-12-10

5.  More scanning, but not zooming, is associated with diagnostic accuracy in evaluating digital breast pathology slides.

Authors:  Trafton Drew; Mark Lavelle; Kathleen F Kerr; Hannah Shucard; Tad T Brunyé; Donald L Weaver; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Global processing provides malignancy evidence complementary to the information captured by humans or machines following detailed mammogram inspection.

Authors:  Ziba Gandomkar; Somphone Siviengphanom; Ernest U Ekpo; Mo'ayyad Suleiman; Seyedamir Tavakoli Taba; Tong Li; Dong Xu; Karla K Evans; Sarah J Lewis; Jeremy M Wolfe; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Tomographic Ultrasound Imaging in the Diagnosis of Breast Tumors under the Guidance of Deep Learning Algorithms.

Authors:  Xuehua Xiao; Fengping Gan; Haixia Yu
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2022-02-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.