A machine learning model based on readers' characteristics to predict their performances in reading screening mammograms

被引:5
作者
Gandomkar, Ziba [1 ]
Lewis, Sarah J. [1 ]
Li, Tong [1 ]
Ekpo, Ernest U. [1 ]
Brennan, Patrick C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Image Optimisat & Percept Grp MIOPeG, Discipline Med Imaging Sci, Fac Med & Hlth, Western Ave, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Area under curve; Inter-observer variability; Machine learning; Mammography; ROC curve; INTERPRETIVE PERFORMANCE; ACCURACY; PREVALENCE; VOLUME; DEPEND;
D O I
10.1007/s12282-022-01335-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objectives Proposing a machine learning model to predict readers' performances, as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and lesion sensitivity, using the readers' characteristics. Methods Data were collected from 905 radiologists and breast physicians who completed at least one case-set of 60 mammographic images containing 40 normal and 20 biopsy-proven cancer cases. Nine different case-sets were available. Using a questionnaire, we collected radiologists' demographic details, such as reading volume and years of experience. These characteristics along with a case set difficulty measure were fed into two ensemble of regression trees to predict the readers' AUCs and lesion sensitivities. We calculated the Pearson correlation coefficient between the predicted values by the model and the actual AUC and lesion sensitivity. The usefulness of the model to categorize readers as low and high performers based on different criteria was also evaluated. The performances of the models were evaluated using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results The Pearson correlation coefficient between the predicted AUC and actual one was 0.60 (p < 0.001). The model's performance for differentiating the reader in the first and fourth quartile based on the AUC values was 0.86 (95% CI 0.83-0.89). The model reached an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI 0.88-0.93) for distinguishing the readers in the first quartile from the fourth one based on the lesion sensitivity. Conclusion A machine learning model can be used to categorize readers as high- or low-performing. Such model could be useful for screening programs for designing a targeted quality assurance and optimizing the double reading practice.
引用
收藏
页码:589 / 598
页数:10
相关论文
共 38 条
  • [1] A. C. o. Radiology, 2013, ACR BI RADS ATL BREA, P37
  • [2] Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists
    Barlow, WE
    Chi, C
    Carney, PA
    Taplin, SH
    D'Orsi, C
    Cutter, G
    Hendrick, RE
    Elmore, JG
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2004, 96 (24): : 1840 - 1850
  • [3] Survey of radiology residents: Breast imaging training and attitudes
    Bassett, LW
    Monsees, BS
    Smith, RA
    Wang, L
    Hooshi, P
    Farria, DM
    Sayre, JW
    Feig, SA
    Jackson, VP
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2003, 227 (03) : 862 - 869
  • [4] Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation
    Beam, CA
    Conant, EF
    Sickles, EA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2003, 95 (04) : 282 - 290
  • [5] Benefits of Independent Double Reading in Digital Mammography: A Theoretical Evaluation of All Possible Pairing Methodologies
    Brennan, Patrick C.
    Ganesan, Aarthi
    Eckstein, Miguel P.
    Ekpo, Ernest Usang
    Tapia, Kriscia
    Mello-Thoms, Claudia
    Lewis, Sarah
    Juni, Mordechai Z.
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2019, 26 (06) : 717 - 723
  • [6] Influence of Annual Interpretive Volume on Screening Mammography Performance in the United States
    Buist, Diana S. M.
    Anderson, Melissa L.
    Haneuse, Sebastien J. P. A.
    Sickles, Edward A.
    Smith, Robert A.
    Carney, Patricia A.
    Taplin, Stephen H.
    Rosenberg, Robert D.
    Geller, Berta M.
    Onega, Tracy L.
    Monsees, Barbara S.
    Bassett, Lawrence W.
    Yankaskas, Bonnie C.
    Elmore, Joann G.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2011, 259 (01) : 72 - 84
  • [7] Addressing the Challenge of Assessing Physician-Level Screening Performance: Mammography as an Example
    Burnside, Elizabeth S.
    Lin, Yunzhi
    del Rio, Alejandro Munoz
    Pickhardt, Perry J.
    Wu, Yirong
    Strigel, Roberta M.
    Elezaby, Mai A.
    Kerr, Eve A.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (02):
  • [8] Analysis of location specific observer performance data: Validated extensions of the jackknife free-response (JAFROC) method
    Chakraborty, Dev P.
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2006, 13 (10) : 1187 - 1193
  • [9] Proficiency test for screening mammography: results for 117 volunteer Italian radiologists
    Ciatto, S
    Ambrogetti, D
    Catarzi, S
    Morrone, D
    Del Turco, MR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 1999, 6 (03) : 149 - 151
  • [10] Context bias - A problem in diagnostic radiology
    Egglin, TKP
    Feinstein, AR
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 276 (21): : 1752 - 1755