The Effect of Image Processing on the Detection of Cancers in Digital Mammography

Warren, Lucy M.; Given-Wilson, Rosalind; Wallis, Matthew; Cooke, Julie; Halling‐Brown, Mark; Mackenzie, Alistair; Chakraborty, Dev P.; Bosmans, Hilde; Dance, David R.; Young, Kenneth C.

doi:10.2214/ajr.13.11812

Cited by 30 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This type of analysis has been performed previously in such similar studies. 8,9,14 Observer's marks were classified as either true positives or false positives. Each mark was compared to the rectangular box draw around the cancers by the experienced radiologist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors

Strudley

Young

Warren

2018

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors

Strudley

Young

Warren

2018

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This processing was designed to be appropriate for a wide range of image qualities but it may not have been perfectly adapted for each type of detector in the trial. Research into the impact of different types of image processing on cancer detection has so far indicated that it has a small effect on calcification detection but little effect on the detection of non-calcification malignant lesions [27,28]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the relationship between image quality measurements and the clinical performance of digital mammographic systems. Methods Mammograms containing subtle malignant non-calcification lesions and simulated malignant calcification clusters were adapted to appear as if acquired by four types of detector. Observers searched for suspicious lesions and gave these a malignancy score. Analysis was undertaken using jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics weighted figure of merit (FoM). Images of a CDMAM contrast-detail phantom were adapted to appear as if acquired using the same four detectors as the clinical images. The resultant threshold gold thicknesses were compared to the FoMs using a linear regression model and an F-test was used to find if the gradient of the relationship was significantly non-zero. Results The detectors with the best image quality measurement also had the highest FoM values. The gradient of the inverse relationship between FoMs and threshold gold thickness for the 0.25mm diameter disk was significantly different from zero for calcification clusters (p=0.027), but not for non-calcification lesions (p=0.11). Systems performing just above the minimum image quality level set in the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis resulted in reduced cancer detection rates compared to systems performing at the achievable level. Conclusions The clinical effectiveness of mammography for the task of detecting calcification clusters was found to be linked to image quality assessment using the CDMAM phantom. The European Guidelines should be reviewed as the current minimum image quality standards may be too low.

show abstract

“…Alphabetical order is not random, but it should effectively mix together the images with and without meniscal tears as there is no association between the first few letters of a patient’s name and the likelihood that the patient will have a meniscal tear 15 . If the authors asserted a method to be random, the method was recorded as random, even if some constraints to random ordering were specified 16 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory bias in observer-performance literature

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. The objective of our study was to determine how authors of published observer–performance experiments dealt with memory bias in study design. We searched American Journal of Roentgenology online and Radiology using “observer study” and “observer performance.” We included articles from 1970 or later that reported an observer performance experiment using human observers. We recorded the methods used by the authors to order presentation of the conditions being tested and images within sets for viewing. We recorded use and length of any time gap between viewings. We included 110 experiments. Forty-five used methods not subject to memory bias. Of 68 remaining experiments, 30 (44.1%) ordered the viewing of tested conditions to decrease memory bias. Fifteen (22.1%) ordered the tested conditions in ways that may create memory bias. Eleven (16.2%) intermixed the tested conditions. Forty-three (63.2%) used random or pseudorandom ordering of images within sets. Forty-six (67.6%) used a time gap (median 14 days) between viewings. Six (8.8%) did not use a time gap. Thirty-six (52.9%) did not indicate what methods they used in at least one studied parameter. Therefore, we conclude that 22.1% of the experiments could improve their methods of ordering tested conditions. Completeness of reporting could be improved by including more details regarding methods of ameliorating memory bias.

show abstract

The Effect of Image Processing on the Detection of Cancers in Digital Mammography

Cited by 30 publications

References 20 publications

Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors

Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors

The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements

Memory bias in observer-performance literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About