Cargando…
Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram
Expert radiologists can discern normal from abnormal mammograms with above-chance accuracy after brief (e.g. 500 ms) exposure. They can even predict cancer risk viewing currently normal images (priors) from women who will later develop cancer. This involves a rapid, global, non-selective process cal...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8572261/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34743266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00339-5 |
_version_ | 1784595183146369024 |
---|---|
author | Raat, E. M. Farr, I. Wolfe, J. M. Evans, K. K. |
author_facet | Raat, E. M. Farr, I. Wolfe, J. M. Evans, K. K. |
author_sort | Raat, E. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Expert radiologists can discern normal from abnormal mammograms with above-chance accuracy after brief (e.g. 500 ms) exposure. They can even predict cancer risk viewing currently normal images (priors) from women who will later develop cancer. This involves a rapid, global, non-selective process called “gist extraction”. It is not yet known whether prolonged exposure can strengthen the gist signal, or if it is available solely in the early exposure. This is of particular interest for the priors that do not contain any localizable signal of abnormality. The current study compared performance with brief (500 ms) or unlimited exposure for four types of mammograms (normal, abnormal, contralateral, priors). Groups of expert radiologists and untrained observers were tested. As expected, radiologists outperformed naïve participants. Replicating prior work, they exceeded chance performance though the gist signal was weak. However, we found no consistent performance differences in radiologists or naïves between timing conditions. Exposure time neither increased nor decreased ability to identify the gist of abnormality or predict cancer risk. If gist signals are to have a place in cancer risk assessments, more efforts should be made to strengthen the signal. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8572261 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85722612021-11-15 Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram Raat, E. M. Farr, I. Wolfe, J. M. Evans, K. K. Cogn Res Princ Implic Original Article Expert radiologists can discern normal from abnormal mammograms with above-chance accuracy after brief (e.g. 500 ms) exposure. They can even predict cancer risk viewing currently normal images (priors) from women who will later develop cancer. This involves a rapid, global, non-selective process called “gist extraction”. It is not yet known whether prolonged exposure can strengthen the gist signal, or if it is available solely in the early exposure. This is of particular interest for the priors that do not contain any localizable signal of abnormality. The current study compared performance with brief (500 ms) or unlimited exposure for four types of mammograms (normal, abnormal, contralateral, priors). Groups of expert radiologists and untrained observers were tested. As expected, radiologists outperformed naïve participants. Replicating prior work, they exceeded chance performance though the gist signal was weak. However, we found no consistent performance differences in radiologists or naïves between timing conditions. Exposure time neither increased nor decreased ability to identify the gist of abnormality or predict cancer risk. If gist signals are to have a place in cancer risk assessments, more efforts should be made to strengthen the signal. Springer International Publishing 2021-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8572261/ /pubmed/34743266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00339-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Raat, E. M. Farr, I. Wolfe, J. M. Evans, K. K. Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title | Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title_full | Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title_fullStr | Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title_short | Comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
title_sort | comparable prediction of breast cancer risk from a glimpse or a first impression of a mammogram |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8572261/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34743266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00339-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT raatem comparablepredictionofbreastcancerriskfromaglimpseorafirstimpressionofamammogram AT farri comparablepredictionofbreastcancerriskfromaglimpseorafirstimpressionofamammogram AT wolfejm comparablepredictionofbreastcancerriskfromaglimpseorafirstimpressionofamammogram AT evanskk comparablepredictionofbreastcancerriskfromaglimpseorafirstimpressionofamammogram |