» Articles » PMID: 28491908

Lack of Agreement Between Radiologists: Implications for Image-based Model Observers

Overview
Specialty Radiology
Date 2017 May 12
PMID 28491908
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We tested the agreement of radiologists' rankings of different reconstructions of breast computed tomography images based on their diagnostic (classification) performance and on their subjective image quality assessments. We used 102 pathology proven cases (62 malignant, 40 benign), and an iterative image reconstruction (IIR) algorithm to obtain 24 reconstructions per case with different image appearances. Using image feature analysis, we selected 3 IIRs and 1 clinical reconstruction and 50 lesions. The reconstructions produced a range of image quality from smooth/low-noise to sharp/high-noise, which had a range in classifier performance corresponding to AUCs of 0.62 to 0.96. Six experienced Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) radiologists rated the likelihood of malignancy for each lesion. We conducted an additional reader study with the same radiologists and a subset of 30 lesions. Radiologists ranked each reconstruction according to their preference. There was disagreement among the six radiologists on which reconstruction produced images with the highest diagnostic content, but they preferred the midsharp/noise image appearance over the others. However, the reconstruction they preferred most did not match with their performance. Due to these disagreements, it may be difficult to develop a single image-based model observer that is representative of a population of radiologists for this particular imaging task.

Citing Articles

Enhanced MobileNet for skin cancer image classification with fused spatial channel attention mechanism.

Cheng H, Lian J, Jiao W Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):28850.

PMID: 39572649 PMC: 11582717. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-80087-w.


Technology and Tool Development for BACPAC: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Accelerated Lumbar Spine MRI with Deep-Learning Based Image Reconstruction at 3T.

Han M, Bahroos E, Hess M, Chin C, Gao K, Shin D Pain Med. 2023; 24(Suppl 1):S149-S159.

PMID: 36943371 PMC: 10403300. DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnad035.


Relationship between computer segmentation performance and computer classification performance in breast CT: A simulation study using RGI segmentation and LDA classification.

Lee J, Nishikawa R, Reiser I, Boone J Med Phys. 2018; .

PMID: 29920684 PMC: 7935026. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13054.

References
1.
Chen W, Giger M, Li H, Bick U, Newstead G . Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med. 2007; 58(3):562-71. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21347. View

2.
Marin T, Kalayeh M, Parages F, Brankov J . Numerical Surrogates for Human Observers in Myocardial Motion Evaluation From SPECT Images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2013; 33(1):38-47. PMC: 4148467. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2013.2279517. View

3.
Hara A, Blevins M, Chen M, Dachman A, Kuo M, Menias C . ACRIN CT colonography trial: does reader's preference for primary two-dimensional versus primary three-dimensional interpretation affect performance?. Radiology. 2011; 259(2):435-41. PMC: 3079118. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11100250. View

4.
Shin C, Kim S, Im J, Kim S, Yu M, Lee E . One-mSv CT colonography: Effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on radiologists' performance. Eur J Radiol. 2016; 85(3):641-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.030. View

5.
Zhang Y, Pham B, Eckstein M . The effect of nonlinear human visual system components on performance of a channelized Hotelling observer in structured backgrounds. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006; 25(10):1348-62. DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2006.880681. View