Current perspectives in medical image perception

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 72, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1205-1217

  Krupinski, Elizabeth A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTENTION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COGNITION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; DYSTHYMIA; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INSTRUMENTATION; LUNG TUMOR; MAMMOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RADIOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW; SACCADIC EYE MOVEMENT; VISION; WORKLOAD; DEVICES; PSYCHOLOGY;

ATTENTION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MENTAL FATIGUE; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; ROC CURVE; SACCADES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; VISUAL PERCEPTION; WORKLOAD;

EID: 77957671880     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/APP.72.5.1205     Document Type: Review

References (88)

1. Abbey, C. K., & Eckstein, M. P. (2010). Observer models as a surrogate to perception experiments. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 240-250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Åhsberg, E. (2000). Dimensions of fatigue in different working populations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41, 231-241.
3. Barrett, H. H., & Myers, K. J. (2003). Foundations of image science. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
4. Barten, P. G. J. (1992). Physical model for the contrast sensitivity of the human eye. In B. E. Rogowitz (Ed.), Proceedings of SPIE: Vol. 1666. Human vision, visual processing, and digital display III (pp. 57-72). San Jose, CA: SPIE Press.
5. Barten, P. G. J. (1999). Contrast sensitivity of the human eye and its effects on image quality. Bellingham, WA: SPIE Press.
6. Beam, C. A., Conant, E. F., & Sickles, E. A. (2003). Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 95, 282-290. doi:10.1093/jnci/95.4.282
7. Beam, C. A., Conant, E. F., Sickles, E. A., & Weinstein, S. P. (2003). Evaluation of proscriptive health care policy implementation in screening mammography. Radiology, 229, 534-540.
8. Beam, C. A., Krupinski, E. A., Kundel, H. L., Sickles, E. A., & Wagner, R. F. (2006). The place of medical image perception in 21stcentury health care. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 3, 409-412. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2006.02.029
9. Berbaum, K. S., Dorfman, D. D., Franken, E. A., Jr., & Caldwell, R. T. (2000). Proper ROC analysis and joint ROC analysis of the satisfaction of search effect in chest radiography. Academic Radiology, 7, 945-958.
10. Berbaum, K. S., El-Khoury, G. Y., Ohashi, K., Schartz, K. M., Caldwell, R. T., Madsen, M., & Franken, E. A., Jr. (2007). Satisfaction of search in multitrauma patients: Severity of detected fractures. Academic Radiology, 14, 711-722.
11. Berbaum, K. [S.], Franken, E., Caldwell, R., & Schartz, K. (2010). Satisfaction of search in traditional radiographic imaging. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 107-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Berlin, L. (2005). Errors of omission. American Journal of Roentgenology, 185, 1416-1421.
13. Berlin, L. (2007). Accuracy of diagnostic procedures: Has it improved over the past five decades? American Journal of Roentgenology, 188, 1173-1178.
14. Berlin, L. (2009). Malpractice issues in radiology: Res ipsa loquitur. American Journal of Roentgenology, 193, 1475-1480. doi:10.2214/AJR.09.3137
15. Beutel, J., Kundel, H. L., & Van Metter, R. L. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of medical imaging: Vol. 1. Physics and psychophysics. Bellingham, WA: SPIE Press.
16. Bhargavan, M., & Sunshine, J. H. (2005). Workload of radiologists in the United States in 2002-2003 and trends since 1991-1992. Radiology, 236, 920-931.
17. Birkelo, C. C., Chamberlain, W. E., Phelps, P. S., Schools, P. E., Zacks, D., & Yerushalmy, J. (1947). Tuberculosis case finding: A comparison of the effectiveness of various roentgenographic and photofluorographic methods. Journal of the American Medical Association, 133, 359-366.
18. Bunch, P. C., Hamilton, J. F., Sanderson, G. K., & Simmons, A. H. (1978). A free-response approach to the measurement and characterization of radiographic observer performance. Journal of Applied Photographic Engineering, 4, 166-171.
19. Burgess, A. (2010a). Signal detection in radiology. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 47-72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Burgess, A. (2010b). Signal detection theory: A brief history. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 26-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Burgess, A. (2010c). Spatial vision research without noise. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 21-25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Carroll, T. J. (2003). Trends in on-call workload in an academic medical center radiology department 1998-2002. Academic Radiology, 10, 1312-1320.
23. Chakraborty, D. P. (1989). Maximum likelihood analysis of free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) data. Medical Physics, 16, 561-568.
24. Chakraborty, D. (2010). Recent developments in FROC methodology. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 216-239). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Chakraborty, D. P., & Berbaum, K. S. (2004). Observer studies involving detection and localization: Modeling, analysis, and validation. Medical Physics, 31, 2313-2330.
26. Chakraborty, D. P., & Winter, L. H. L. (1990). Free-response methodology: Alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. Radiology, 174, 873-881.
27. Chunn, T., & Honeyman, J. (2000). Storage and database. In Y. Kim & S. C. Horii (Eds.), Handbook of medical imaging: Vol. 3. Display and PACS (pp. 365-401). Bellingham, WA: SPIE Press.
28. Dorfman, D. D., & Berbaum, K. S. (2000). A contaminated binormal model for ROC data: Part II. A formal model. Academic Radiology, 7, 427-437.
29. Dorfman, D. D., Berbaum, K. S., & Metz, C. E. (1992). Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Investigative Radiology, 27, 723-731.
30. Ebenholtz, S. M. (2001). Oculomotor systems and perception. New York: Cambridge University Press.
31. Edwards, D. C., & Metz, C. E. (2007). Optimization of restricted ROC surfaces in three-class classification tasks. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 26, 1345-1356.
32. Garland, L. H. (1949). On the scientific evaluation of diagnostic procedures. Radiology, 52, 309-328.
33. Goo, J. M., Choi, J. Y., Im, J. G., Lee, H. J., Chung, M. J., Han, D. H., et al. (2004). Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs. Radiology, 232, 762-766.
34. He, X., & Frey, E. C. (2009). The validity of three-class Hotelling trace (3-HT) in describing three-class task performance: Comparison of three-class volume under ROC surface (VUS) and 3-HT. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 28, 185-193.
35. He, X., Gallas, B. D., & Frey, E. C. (2010). Three-class ROC analysis: Toward a general decision theoretic solution. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 29, 206-215.
36. Hillis, S. (2010). Multireader ROC analysis. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 204-215). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Hu, C. H., Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F., Krupinski, E. A., & Toto, L. C. (1994). Searching for bone fractures: A comparison with pulmonary nodule search. Academic Radiology, 1, 25-32.
38. Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., & Lilienthal, M. G. (1993). Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 203-220.
39. Krupinski, E. A. (1996). Visual scanning patterns of radiologists searching mammograms. Academic Radiology, 3, 137-144.
40. Krupinski, E. A., & Berbaum, K. S. (2009). The Medical Image Perception Society update on key issues for image perception research. Radiology, 253, 230-233.
41. Krupinski, E. A., & Berbaum, K. S. (2010). Does reader visual fatigue impact interpretation accuracy? In D. J. Manning & C. K. Abbey (Eds.), Proceedings of SPIE: Vol. 7627. Image perception, observer performance, and technology assessment (Article No. 762701). doi:10.1117/12.841050
42. Krupinski, E. A., & Jiang, Y. (2008). Anniversary paper: Evaluation of medical imaging systems. Medical Physics, 35, 645-659.
43. Krupinski, E. A., & Kallergi, M. (2007). Choosing a radiology workstation: Technical and clinical considerations. Radiology, 242, 671-682.
44. Krupinski, E. A., LeSueur, B., Ellsworth, L., Levine, N., Hansen, R., Silvis, N., et al. (1999). Diagnostic accuracy and image quality using a digital camera for teledermatology. Telemedicine Journal, 5, 257-263.
45. Krupinski, E. A., Nodine, C. F., & Kundel, H. L. (1998). Enhancing recognition of lesions in radiographic images using perceptual feedback. Optical Engineering, 37, 813-818.
46. Krupinski, E. A., Nypaver, M., Poropatich, R., Ellis, D., Safwat, R., & Sapci, H. (2002). Clinical applications in telemedicine/telehealth. Telemedicine Journal & e-Health, 8, 13-34.
47. Krupinski, E. A., Siddiqui, K., Siegel, E., Shrestha, R., Grant, E., Roehrig, H., & Fan, J. (2007). Influence of 8-bit vs. 11-bit digital displays on observer performance and visual search: A multi-center evaluation. Journal of the Society for Information Display, 15, 385-390.
48. Krupinski, E. A., Tillack, A. A., Richter, L., Henderson, J. T., Bhattacharyya, A. K., Scott, K. M., et al. (2006). Eye-movement study and human performance using telepathology virtual slides: Implications for medical education and differences with experience. Human Pathology, 37, 1543-1556.
49. Kundel, H. L. (1975). Peripheral vision, structured noise, and film reader error. Radiology, 114, 269-273.
50. Kundel, H. L. (1989). Perception errors in chest radiography. Seminars in Respiratory Medicine, 10, 203-210.
51. Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F., & Carmody, D. P. (1978). Visual scanning, pattern recognition, and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. Investigative Radiology, 13, 175-181.
52. Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F., & Krupinski, E. A. (1989). Searching for lung nodules: Visual dwell indicates locations of false-positive and false-negative decisions. Investigative Radiology, 24, 472-478.
53. Kupinski, M. (2010). Implementation of observer models. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 251-258). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Lu, Y., Zhao, S., Chu, P. W., & Arenson, R. L. (2008). An update survey of academic radiologists' clinical productivity. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 5, 817-826.
55. Lund, P. J., Krupinski, E. A., Pereles, S., & Mockbee, B. (1997). Comparison of conventional and computed radiography: Assessment of image quality and reader performance in skeletal extremity trauma. Academic Radiology, 4, 570-576.
56. MacKenzie, W. (1843). On asthenopia or weak-sightedness. Edinburgh Medical & Surgical Journal, 60, 73-103.
57. Manning, D. J., Ethell, S. C., & Donovan, T. (2004). Detection or decision errors? Missed lung cancer from the posteroanterior chest radiograph. British Journal of Radiology, 77, 231-235.
58. Manning, D. J., Gale, A., & Krupinski, E. A. (2005). Perception research in medical imaging. British Journal of Radiology, 78, 683-685. doi:10.1259/bjr/72087985
59. Meghea, C., & Sunshine, J. H. (2007). Determinants of radiologists' desired workloads. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 4, 166-170.
60. Metz, C. E., & Pan, X. (1999). "Proper" binormal ROC curves: Theory and maximum-likelihood estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 1-33.
61. Mukerji, N., Wallace, D., & Mitra, D. (2006). Audit of the change in the on-call practices in neuroradiology and factors affecting it. BMC Medical Imaging, 6, 13-17. doi:10.1186/1471-2342-6-13
62. Nakajima, Y., Yamada, K., Imamura, K., & Kobayashi, K. (2008). Radiologist supply and workload: International comparison. Radiation Medicine, 26, 455-465.
63. Newell, R. R., Chamberlain, W. E., & Rigler, L. (1954). Descriptive classification of pulmonary shadows: A revelation of unreliability in roentgenographic diagnosis of tuberculosis. American Review of Tuberculosis, 69, 566-584.
64. Nodine, C. F., & Kundel, H. L. (1987). Using eye movements to study visual search and to improve tumor detection. RadioGraphics, 7, 1241-1250.
65. Nodine, C. F., Kundel, H. L., Mello-Thoms, C., Weinstein, S. P., Orel, S. G., Sullivan, D. C., & Conant, E. F. (1999). How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Academic Radiology, 6, 575-585. doi:10.1016/S1076-6332(99)80252-9
66. Nodine, C. [F.], & Mello-Thoms, C. (2010). The role of expertise in radiologic image interpretation. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 139-156). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
67. Nodine, C. F., Mello-Thoms, C., Kundel, H. L., & Weinstein, S. P. (2002). Time course of perception and decision making during mammographic interpretation. American Journal of Roentgenology, 179, 917-923.
68. Obuchowski, N. A., Lieber, M. L., & Powell, K. A. (2000). Data analysis for detection and localization of multiple abnormalities with application to mammography. Academic Radiology, 7, 516-525.
69. Pan, X., & Metz, C. E. (1997). The "proper" binormal model: Parametric ROC curve estimation with degenerate data. Academic Radiology, 4, 380-389.
70. Pesce, L. L., & Metz, C. E. (2007). Reliable and computationally efficient maximum-likelihood estimation of "proper" binormal ROC curves. Academic Radiology, 14, 814-829.
71. Rutter, C. M. (2000). Bootstrap estimation of diagnostic accuracy with patient-clustered data. Academic Radiology, 7, 413-419.
72. Samei, E., Flynn, M. J., & Kearfott, K. J. (1997). Patient dose and detectability of subtle lung nodules in digital chest radiographs [Abstract]. Health Physics, 72(6 Suppl.).
73. Samei, E., & Krupinski, E. (Eds.) (2010). The handbook of medical image perception and techniques. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
74. Saunders, R. S., Jr., Baker, J. A., Delong, D. M., Johnson, J. P., & Samei, E. (2007). Does image quality matter? Impact of resolution and noise on mammographic task performance. Medical Physics, 34, 3971-3981.
75. Smith, M. J. (1967). Error and variation in diagnostic radiology. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
76. Starr, S. J., Metz, C. E., Lusted, L. B., & Goodenough, D. J. (1975). Visual detection and localization of radiographic images. Radiology, 116, 533-538.
77. Starr, S. J., Metz, C. E., Lusted, L. B., Sharp, P. F., & Herath, K. B. (1977). Comments on the generalization of receiver operating characteristic analysis to detection and localization tasks. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 22, 376-379.
78. Sunshine, J. H., & Maynard, C. D. (2008). Update on the diagnostic radiology employment market: Findings through 2007-2008. American Journal of Roentgenology, 5, 827-833.
79. Swensson, R. G. (1996). Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. Medical Physics, 23, 1709-1725.
80. Swensson, R. G., & Judy, P. F. (1981). Detection of noisy visual targets: Models for the effects of spatial uncertainty and signal-to-noise ratio. Perception & Psychophysics, 29, 521-534.
81. Thakur, M. L. (2009). Genomic biomarkers for molecular imaging: Predicting the future. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 39, 236-246. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.03.006
82. Thind, R., Barter, S., & Service Review Committee (2008). The Service Review Committee: Royal College of Radiologists. Philosophy, role, and lessons to be learned. Clinical Radiology, 63, 118-124.
83. Tourassi, G. (2010). Receiver operating characteristic analysis: Basic concepts and practical applications. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The handbook of medical image perception and techniques (pp. 187-203). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
84. Tuddenham, W. J. (1962). Visual search, image organization, and reader error in roentgen diagnosis: Studies of psychophysiology of roentgen image perception. Radiology, 78, 694-704.
85. Tuddenham, W. J. (1963). Problems of perception in chest roentgenology: Facts and fallacies. Radiological Clinics of North America, 1, 277-289.
86. Tuddenham, W. J., & Calvert, W. P. (1961). Visual search patterns in roentgen diagnosis. Radiology, 76, 255-256.
87. Vertinsky, T., & Forster, B. (2005). Prevalence of eye strain among radiologists: Influence of viewing variables on symptoms. American Journal of Roentgenology, 184, 681-686.
88. Weinstein, R. S., Graham, A. R., Richter, L. C., Barker, G. P., Krupinski, E. A., Lopez, A. M., et al. (2009). Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: Prospects for the future. Human Pathology, 40, 1057-1069. doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2009.04.006