Literature DB >> 31410677

Can a Machine Learn from Radiologists' Visual Search Behaviour and Their Interpretation of Mammograms-a Deep-Learning Study.

Suneeta Mall1, Patrick C Brennan2, Claudia Mello-Thoms2,3.   

Abstract

Visual search behaviour and the interpretation of mammograms have been studied for errors in breast cancer detection. We aim to ascertain whether machine-learning models can learn about radiologists' attentional level and the interpretation of mammograms. We seek to determine whether these models are practical and feasible for use in training and teaching programmes. Eight radiologists of varying experience levels in reading mammograms reviewed 120 two-view digital mammography cases (59 cancers). Their search behaviour and decisions were captured using a head-mounted eye-tracking device and software allowing them to record their decisions. This information from radiologists was used to build an ensembled machine-learning model using top-down hierarchical deep convolution neural network. Separately, a model to determine type of missed cancer (search, perception or decision-making) was also built. Analysis and comparison of variants of these models using different convolution networks with and without transfer learning were also performed. Our ensembled deep-learning network architecture can be trained to learn about radiologists' attentional level and decisions. High accuracy (95%, p value ≅ 0 [better than dumb/random model]) and high agreement between true and predicted values (kappa = 0.83) in such modelling can be achieved. Transfer learning techniques improve by < 10% with the performance of this model. We also show that spatial convolution neural networks are insufficient in determining the type of missed cancers. Ensembled hierarchical deep convolution machine-learning models are plausible in modelling radiologists' attentional level and their interpretation of mammograms. However, deep convolution networks fail to characterise the type of false-negative decisions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Deep learning; Machine learning; Mammography; Visual search

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31410677      PMCID: PMC6737161          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-018-00174-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  21 in total

1.  Repetition effects in visual search.

Authors:  A P Hillstrom
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2000-05

2.  Perception of breast cancer: eye-position analysis of mammogram interpretation.

Authors:  Claudia Mello-Thoms
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  The perception of breast cancer: what differentiates missed from reported cancers in mammography?

Authors:  Claudia Mello-Thoms; Stanley Dunn; Calvin F Nodine; Harold L Kundel; Susan P Weinstein
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Visual search, image organization, and reader error in roentgen diagnosis. Studies of the psycho-physiology of roentgen image perception.

Authors:  W J TUDDENHAM
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1962-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Detection or decision errors? Missed lung cancer from the posteroanterior chest radiograph.

Authors:  D J Manning; S C Ethell; T Donovan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Viewing another person's eye movements improves identification of pulmonary nodules in chest x-ray inspection.

Authors:  Damien Litchfield; Linden J Ball; Tim Donovan; David J Manning; Trevor Crawford
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2010-09

7.  Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation: gaze-tracking study.

Authors:  Harold L Kundel; Calvin F Nodine; Emily F Conant; Susan P Weinstein
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Searching for lung nodules. The guidance of visual scanning.

Authors:  H L Kundel; C F Nodine; L Toto
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 9.  Digital tomosynthesis: a new future for breast imaging?

Authors:  M Alakhras; R Bourne; M Rickard; K H Ng; M Pietrzyk; P C Brennan
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 2.350

10.  The perception of breast cancers--a spatial frequency analysis of what differentiates missed from reported cancers.

Authors:  Claudia Mello-Thoms; Stanley M Dunn; Calvin F Nodine; Harold L Kundel
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 10.048

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.