Cargando…
Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks
Purpose: Computer-aided detection (CAD) alerts radiologists to findings potentially associated with breast cancer but is notorious for creating false-positive marks. Although a previous paper found that radiologists took more time to interpret mammograms with more CAD marks, our impression was that...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6996587/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32042859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.7.2.022408 |
_version_ | 1783493538321793024 |
---|---|
author | Schwartz, Tayler M. Hillis, Stephen L. Sridharan, Radhika Lukyanchenko, Olga Geiser, William Whitman, Gary J. Wei, Wei Haygood, Tamara Miner |
author_facet | Schwartz, Tayler M. Hillis, Stephen L. Sridharan, Radhika Lukyanchenko, Olga Geiser, William Whitman, Gary J. Wei, Wei Haygood, Tamara Miner |
author_sort | Schwartz, Tayler M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Purpose: Computer-aided detection (CAD) alerts radiologists to findings potentially associated with breast cancer but is notorious for creating false-positive marks. Although a previous paper found that radiologists took more time to interpret mammograms with more CAD marks, our impression was that this was not true in actual interpretation. We hypothesized that radiologists would selectively disregard these marks when present in larger numbers. Approach: We performed a retrospective review of bilateral digital screening mammograms. We use a mixed linear regression model to assess the relationship between number of CAD marks and ln (interpretation time) after adjustment for covariates. Both readers and mammograms were treated as random sampling units. Results: Ten radiologists, with median experience after residency of 12.5 years (range 6 to 24) interpreted 1832 mammograms. After accounting for number of images, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category, and breast density, the number of CAD marks was positively associated with longer interpretation time, with each additional CAD mark proportionally increasing median interpretation time by 4.35% for a typical reader. Conclusions: We found no support for our hypothesis that radiologists will selectively disregard CAD marks when they are present in larger numbers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6996587 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69965872021-02-03 Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks Schwartz, Tayler M. Hillis, Stephen L. Sridharan, Radhika Lukyanchenko, Olga Geiser, William Whitman, Gary J. Wei, Wei Haygood, Tamara Miner J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Special Section on Medical Image Perception and Observer Performance Purpose: Computer-aided detection (CAD) alerts radiologists to findings potentially associated with breast cancer but is notorious for creating false-positive marks. Although a previous paper found that radiologists took more time to interpret mammograms with more CAD marks, our impression was that this was not true in actual interpretation. We hypothesized that radiologists would selectively disregard these marks when present in larger numbers. Approach: We performed a retrospective review of bilateral digital screening mammograms. We use a mixed linear regression model to assess the relationship between number of CAD marks and ln (interpretation time) after adjustment for covariates. Both readers and mammograms were treated as random sampling units. Results: Ten radiologists, with median experience after residency of 12.5 years (range 6 to 24) interpreted 1832 mammograms. After accounting for number of images, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category, and breast density, the number of CAD marks was positively associated with longer interpretation time, with each additional CAD mark proportionally increasing median interpretation time by 4.35% for a typical reader. Conclusions: We found no support for our hypothesis that radiologists will selectively disregard CAD marks when they are present in larger numbers. Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers 2020-02-03 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6996587/ /pubmed/32042859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.7.2.022408 Text en © 2020 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI. |
spellingShingle | Special Section on Medical Image Perception and Observer Performance Schwartz, Tayler M. Hillis, Stephen L. Sridharan, Radhika Lukyanchenko, Olga Geiser, William Whitman, Gary J. Wei, Wei Haygood, Tamara Miner Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title | Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title_full | Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title_fullStr | Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title_full_unstemmed | Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title_short | Interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
title_sort | interpretation time for screening mammography as a function of the number of computer-aided detection marks |
topic | Special Section on Medical Image Perception and Observer Performance |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6996587/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32042859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.7.2.022408 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schwartztaylerm interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT hillisstephenl interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT sridharanradhika interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT lukyanchenkoolga interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT geiserwilliam interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT whitmangaryj interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT weiwei interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks AT haygoodtamaraminer interpretationtimeforscreeningmammographyasafunctionofthenumberofcomputeraideddetectionmarks |