CAD in questions/answers

Boyer, Bruno; Balleyguier, Corinne; Granat, O; Pharaboz, C

doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.07.042

Cited by 27 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nine of them were review articles [12,16-18,24-28]. Many studies had not been performed in screening settings or had selected or enriched populations, sometimes without comparison between single reading + CAD and double reading [14,29-57].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn accordance with European guidelines, mammography screening comprises independent readings by two breast radiologists (double reading). CAD (computer-aided detection) has been suggested to complement or replace one of the two readers (single reading + CAD).The aim of this systematic review is to address the following question: Is the reading of mammographic x-ray images by a single breast radiologist together with CAD at least as accurate as double reading?MethodsThe electronic literature search included the databases Pub Med, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers assessed abstracts and full-text articles.Results1049 abstracts were identified, of which 996 were excluded with reference to inclusion and exclusion criteria; 53 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Finally, four articles were included in the qualitative analysis, and one in a GRADE synthesis.ConclusionsThe scientific evidence is insufficient to determine whether the accuracy of single reading + CAD is at least equivalent to that obtained in standard practice, i.e. double reading where two breast radiologists independently read the mammographic images.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several commercial breast cancer CAD systems have been FDA approved and currently used by radiologists, examples are Image Checker (R2 technologies, USA) and second look (iCAD systems, Canada). Although most CAD systems achieved high sensitivity for detecting MCs and masses [5], they still provide low sensitivity for amorphous microcalcifications and other mammogram abnormalities such as architectural distortions [6]. Also, current CAD systems cannot be used as second reader because of the low specificity of the detection estimated at 1000 benign alarms for one cancer [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Boyer et al [6] presented a questions/answers review on the use of CAD technology for breast cancer. Using results from several relevant studies they addressed two important questions: (1) can a CAD system replace the first or double reading?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bayesian Classifier with Simplified Learning Phase for Detecting Microcalcifications in Digital Mammograms

Zyout

Abdel‐Qader

Jacobs

2009

International Journal of Biomedical Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection of clustered microcalcifications (MCs) in mammograms represents a significant step towards successful detection of breast cancer since their existence is one of the early signs of cancer. In this paper, a new framework that integrates Bayesian classifier and a pattern synthesizing scheme for detecting microcalcification clusters is proposed. This proposed work extracts textural, spectral, and statistical features of each input mammogram and generates models of real MCs to be used as training samples through a simplified learning phase of the Bayesian classifier. Followed by an estimation of the classifier's decision function parameters, a mammogram is segmented into the identified targets (MCs) against background (healthy tissue). The proposed algorithm has been tested using 23 mammograms from the mini-MIAS database. Experimental results achieved MCs detection with average true positive (sensitivity) and false positive (specificity) of 91.3% and 98.6%, respectively. Results also indicate that the modeling of the real MCs plays a significant role in the performance of the classifier and thus should be given further investigation.

show abstract

“…In order to solve this problem, the use of computer-aided detection (CADe) systems and/or reporting by radiographers as a second opinion for radiologists' readings have been investigated. Since many research groups have demonstrated the clinical usefulness of various CADe systems, [1][2][3][4][5][6] CADe is accepted as the standard of care in the USA and is used in approximately 75% of screening examinations. 6,7 On the other hand, reporting by radiographers has been recommended as another approach to aid radiologists' readings in several countries.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since many research groups have demonstrated the clinical usefulness of various CADe systems, [1][2][3][4][5][6] CADe is accepted as the standard of care in the USA and is used in approximately 75% of screening examinations. 6,7 On the other hand, reporting by radiographers has been recommended as another approach to aid radiologists' readings in several countries. [8][9][10] Although the use of CADe requires initial costs for introducing CADe systems, reporting by radiographers can be applied in almost all medical institutions without any additional facility costs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using breast radiographers' reports as a second opinion for radiologists' readings of microcalcifications in digital mammography

Tanaka

Takamori

Uchiyama

et al. 2015

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

CAD in questions/answers

Cited by 27 publications

References 43 publications

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

Bayesian Classifier with Simplified Learning Phase for Detecting Microcalcifications in Digital Mammograms

Using breast radiographers' reports as a second opinion for radiologists' readings of microcalcifications in digital mammography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About