Cited 0 times in
Comparison of Diagnostic Performances among Different Interpretation Schemes for Screening Mammography: A simulation study
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 김은경 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 노미리비 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 서희정 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 윤정현 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이시은 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이혜선 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-01-03T01:08:38Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-01-03T01:08:38Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023-12 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1738-3501 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/197470 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: To compare the diagnostic outcomes of different interpretation schemes simulated for interpreting screening mammography, adding AI-CAD vs. a second human reader to a single human reader, using a consecutive, screening study sample. Materials and Methods: Between January 2018 and January 2019, 2,385 digital mammograms of 2,385 consecutive women (mean age: 50.0±9.5 years) were included. As single reading is routine in our practice, interpretation reports were used as data for single reading. To simulate double reading, a second reader independently reviewed the screening mammograms with access to the interpretation reports. To simulate single reading interpretation with AI-CAD, one of the first readers re-evaluated the mammography images with positive AI-CAD results. Ground truth in terms of cancer/benign or absence of abnormality was confirmed according to histopathologic diagnosis or at least 1 year of follow-up. Results: Among the 2385 mammograms, 6 (0.3%) were cancers, 32 (1.3%) were biopsy-confirmed benign, and 2347 (98.4%) were negative examinations. Reader 1+AI-CAD had significantly higher recall rates compared to reader 1, 2.6% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 2.0-3.3) vs. 2.4% (95% CI: 1.7-3.0) (p=0.008), respectively, that was lower than reader 1+2, 3.1% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8) (P=0.010). Specificity and accuracy were significantly higher in reader 1 compared to both reader 1+2 and reader 1+AI-CAD (all p<0.05, respectively). Reader 1+AI-CAD had significantly higher specificity (97.6% vs. 97.1%) and accuracy (97.5% vs. 97.0%) compared to reader 1+2 (p=0.010), respectively. High proportion of falsepositive findings detected by AI-CAD were distortions, while calcifications were mostly the cause for false-positive findings detected by the readers. Conclusion: Adding readers, either AI-CAD or human second readers, results in higher recalls with significantly lower specificity and accuracy compared to a single human reader. When comparing the effect of adding AI-CAD vs. human second reader, AI-CAD had significantly lower recall and higher specificity and accuracy compared to the scheme of two human readers. | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | open | - |
dc.language | Korean | - |
dc.publisher | 대한유방검진학회 | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | Journal of the Korean Society for Breast Screening(대한유방검진학회지) | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.title | Comparison of Diagnostic Performances among Different Interpretation Schemes for Screening Mammography: A simulation study | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine (의과대학) | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Miribi Rho | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Hye Sun Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Hee Jung Suh | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Eun-Kyung Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Si Eun Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jung Hyun Yoon | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00801 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A05327 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A01925 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02595 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A05611 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A03312 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J01541 | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Mammography | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Breast neoplasms | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Artificial intelligence | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Computer-Assisted detection/ diagnosis | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Kim, Eun Kyung | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김은경 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 노미리비 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 서희정 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 윤정현 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 이시은 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 이혜선 | - |
dc.citation.volume | 20 | - |
dc.citation.number | 2 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 52 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 61 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Journal of the Korean Society for Breast Screening (대한유방검진학회지), Vol.20(2) : 52-61, 2023-12 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.