Investigation of viewing procedures for interpretation of breast tomosynthesis image volumes: A detection-task study with eye tracking

European Radiology

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 997-1005

  Timberg, Pontus ^a   Lång, Kristina ^a   Nyström, Marcus ^a   Holmqvist, Kenneth ^a   Wagner, Philippe ^b   Förnvik, Daniel ^a   Tingberg, Anders ^a   Zackrisson, Sophia ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Breast tomosynthesis; Eye tracking; Image volumes; Perception; Reading frames

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; EYE MOVEMENT; EYE TRACKING; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FORCED CHOICE METHOD; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; NORMAL HUMAN; PATIENT SELECTION; PECTORAL MUSCLE; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SMOOTH PURSUIT EYE MOVEMENT; TASK PERFORMANCE; TOMOGRAPHY; VISUAL FIELD;

EID: 84878544104     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2675-z     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE (2002) Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 359:909-919
2. Tabár L, Yen MF, Vitak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW (2003) Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet 361:1405-1410
3. Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen T, et al. (2011) Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology 260:658-663
4. Ferrini R, Mannino E, Ramsdell E, Hill L (1996) Screening mammography for breast cancer: American College of Preventive Medicine practice policy statement. Am J Prev Med 12:340-341
5. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. (2005) Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773-1783
6. Skaane P, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F et al. (2005) Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading - observer performance study. Radiology 237:37-44
7. Park JM, Franken EA Jr, Garg M, Fajardo LL, Niklason LT (2007) Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics 27:S231-S240
8. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE et al. (1997) Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 205:399-406
9. Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S et al. (2008) Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol 18:2817-2825
10. Gur D, Abrams GS, Chough DM et al. (2009) Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:586-591
11. Good WF, Abrams GS, Catullo VJ et al. (2008) Digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot observer study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:865-869
12. Copley SJ, Bryant TH, Chambers AA et al. (2010) Observer accuracy in the detection of pulmonary nodules on CT: effect of cine frame rate. Clin Radiol 65:133-136
13. Gur D, Good WF, Oliver JH et al. (1994) Sequential viewing of abdominal CT images at varying rates. Radiology 191:119-122
14. Kundel HL (1975) Peripheral vision, structured noise and film reader error. Radiology 114:269-273
15. Banks M, Sekuler A, Anderson S (1991) Peripheral spatial vision: limits imposed by optics, photreceptors, and recepto pooling. J Opt Soc Am A 8:1775-1787
16. Engel F (1977) Visual conspicuity, visual search and fixation tendencies of the eye. Vis Res 17:95-108
17. Anstis SM (1974) A chart demonstrating variations in acuity with retinal position. Vision Res 14:589-592
18. Philips MH, Edelman JA (2008) The dependence of visual scanning performance on search direction and difficulty. Vision Res 48:2184-2192
19. Megaw E, Richardson J (1979) Eye movements and industrial inspection. Appl Ergon 10:145-154
20. Abrams R, Christ S (2003) Motion onset captures attention. Psychol Sci 14:427-432
21. Holmqvist K, Nyström N, Andersson R, Dewhurst R, Jarodzka H, van de Weijer J (2011) Eye tracking: a comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford University Press, Oxford
22. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Conant EF, Weinstein SP (2007) Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation: gaze-tracking study. Radiology 242:396-402
23. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Krupinski EA, Mello-Thoms C (2008) Using gaze-tracking data and mixture distribution analysis to support a holistic model for the detection of cancers on mammograms. Acad Radiol 15:881-886
24. Mello-Thoms C (2006) How does the perception of a lesion influence visual search strategy in mammogram reading? Acad Radiol 13:275-288
25. Mello-Thoms C (2006) The problem of image interpretation in mammography: effects of lesion conspicuity on the visual search strategy of radiologists. Br J Radiol 79(Spec No 2):S111-S116
26. Mello-Thoms C, Hardesty L, Sumkin J et al. (2005) Effects of lesion conspicuity on visual search in mammogram reading. Acad Radiol 12:830-840
27. Manning DJ (2004) Detection or decision errors? Missed lung cancer from the posteroanterior chest radiograph. Br J Radiol 77:231-235
28. Manning D, Barker-Mill SC, Donovan T, Crawford T (2006) Time-dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule detection. Br J Radiol 79:342-346
29. Litchfield D, Ball LJ, Donovan T, Manning DJ, Crawford T (2010) Viewing another person's eye movements improves identification of pulmonary nodules in chest x-ray inspection. J Exp Psychol Appl 16:251-262
30. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto L (1991) Searching for lung nodules: the guidance of visual scanning. Invest Radiol 26:777-781
31. Ellis SM, Hu X, Dempere-Marco L, Yang GZ, Wells AU, Hansell DM (2006) Thin-section CT of the lungs: eye-tracking analysis of the visual approach to reading tiled and stacked display formats. Eur J Radiol 59:257-264
32. Timberg P, Båth M, Andersson I, Mattsson S, Tingberg A, Ruschin M (2012) Visibility of microcalcification clusters and masses in breast tomosynthesis image volumes and digital mammography: a 4-AFC human observer study. Med Phys 39:2431-2437
33. Timberg P, Båth M, Andersson I, Mattsson S, Tingberg A, Ruschin M (2010) In-plane visibility of lesions using breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography. Med Phys 37:5618-5626
34. Burgess AE (1995) Comparison of receiver operating characteristic and forced choice observer performance measurement methods. Med Phys 22:643-655
35. Burgess AE, Jacobson FL, Judy PF (2001) Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. Med Phys 28:419-437
36. Boone JM, Lindfors KK, Cooper VN 3rd, Seibert JA (2000) Scatter/primary in mammography: comprehensive results. Med Phys 27:2408-2416
37. Wu G, Mainprize JG, Boone JM, Yaffe MJ (2009) Evaluation of scatter effects on image quality for breast tomosynthesis. Med Phys 36:4425-4432
38. Mertelmeier T (2006) Optimizing filtered backprojection reconstruction for a breast tomosynthesis prototype device. Proc SPIE 6142:131-142
39. Börjesson S, Håkansson M, Båth M et al. (2005) A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology. Radiat Prot Dosim 114:45-52
40. Håkansson M, Svensson S, Zachrisson S, Svalkvist A, Båth M, Månsson LG (2010) ViewDEX: an efficient and easy-to-use software for observer performance studies. Radiat Prot Dosim 139:42-51
41. Noel A, Thibault F (2004) Digital detectors for mammography: the technical challenges. Eur Radiol 14:1990-1998
42. Ojanpaa HR, Nasanen R, Kojo I (2002) Eye movements in visual search of word lists. Vision Res 42:1499-1512
43. Beam CA, Krupinski EA, Kundel HL, Sickles EA, Wagner RF (2006) The place of medical image perception in 21st-century health care. J Am Coll Radiol 3:409-412
44. Franconeri SL, Simons DJ (2003) Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Percept Psychophys 65:999-1010
45. Nodine CF, Mello-Thoms C, Kundel HL, Weinstein SP (2002) Time course of perception and decision making during mammographic interpretation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:917-923