Literature DB >> 31853462

Gist processing in digital breast tomosynthesis.

Chia-Chien Wu1,2, Nicholas M D'Ardenne3, Robert M Nishikawa3, Jeremy M Wolfe1,2.   

Abstract

Evans et al. (2016) showed that radiologists can classify the mammograms as normal or abnormal at above-chance levels after a 250-ms exposure. Our study documents a similar gist signal in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images. DBT is a relatively new technology that creates a three-dimensional image set of slices through the volume of the breast. It improves performance over two-dimensional (2-D) mammography but at a cost in reading time. In the experiment presented, radiologists ( N = 16 ) viewed "movies" of DBT images from single breasts for an average of 1.5 s per case. Observers then marked the most likely lesion position on a blank outline and rated each case on a six-point scale from (1) certainly normal to (6) certainly recall. Results show that radiologists can discriminate normal from abnormal DBT cases at above-chance levels as in 2-D mammography. Ability was correlated with experience reading DBT. Observers performed at above-chance levels, even on those images where they could not localize the target, suggesting that this is a global signal that could prove valuable in the clinic.
© 2019 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE).

Keywords:  gist processing; perception; tomography

Year:  2019        PMID: 31853462      PMCID: PMC6917568          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.7.2.022403

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


  24 in total

1.  Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search.

Authors:  H L Kundel; C F Nodine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis; Nancy A Obuchowski; Kevin M Schartz; Kevin S Berbaum
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods for multiple observer ROC analysis.

Authors:  Stephen L Hillis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-02-10       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Initial scene representations facilitate eye movement guidance in visual search.

Authors:  Monica S Castelhano; John M Henderson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Lung lesions: correlation between viewing time and detection.

Authors:  J W Oestmann; R Greene; D C Kushner; P M Bourgouin; L Linetsky; H J Llewellyn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Unsupervised Deep Learning Applied to Breast Density Segmentation and Mammographic Risk Scoring.

Authors:  Michiel Kallenberg; Kersten Petersen; Mads Nielsen; Andrew Y Ng; Christian Igel; Celine M Vachon; Katharina Holland; Rikke Rass Winkel; Nico Karssemeijer; Martin Lillholm
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Does visual expertise improve visual recognition memory?

Authors:  Karla K Evans; Michael A Cohen; Rosemary Tambouret; Todd Horowitz; Erica Kreindel; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Do target detection and target localization always go together? Extracting information from briefly presented displays.

Authors:  Ann J Carrigan; Susan G Wardle; Anina N Rich
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Textons, visual pop-out effects, and object recognition in infancy.

Authors:  C Rovee-Collier; E Hankins; R Bhatt
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1992-12

10.  Detecting the "gist" of breast cancer in mammograms three years before localized signs of cancer are visible.

Authors:  Karla K Evans; Anne-Marie Culpan; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 3.039

View more
  4 in total

1.  Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram.

Authors:  E M Raat; I Farr; J M Wolfe; K K Evans
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2021-11-06

2.  Statistical feature training improves fingerprint-matching accuracy in novices and professional fingerprint examiners.

Authors:  Bethany Growns; Alice Towler; James D Dunn; Jessica M Salerno; N J Schweitzer; Itiel E Dror
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2022-07-16

3.  Characteristics of expert search behavior in volumetric medical image interpretation.

Authors:  Lauren H Williams; Ann J Carrigan; Megan Mills; William F Auffermann; Anina N Rich; Trafton Drew
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-07-14

4.  What can an echocardiographer see in briefly presented stimuli? Perceptual expertise in dynamic search.

Authors:  A J Carrigan; P Stoodley; F Fernandez; M W Wiggins
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2020-07-21
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.