Academic Radiology
Volume 10, Issue 1 , Pages 1-3 , January 2003

The Future of Image Perception in Radiology: Synergy between Humans and Computers

  • Elizabeth A Krupinski, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationDepartment of Radiology—Research, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724

Received 1 November 2002 ,Accepted 4 November 2002.

References 

    References
  1. Neisser U. In: Cognition and reality: principles and implications of cognitive psychology. San Francisco, Calif: W.H. Freeman; 1976;p. 20
  2. Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Mello-Thoms C, et al.  How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Acad Radiol. 1999;6:575–585
  3. Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C, et al.  Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:369–375
  4. Birkelo CC, Chamberlain WE, Phelps PS, Schools PE, Zachs D, Yerushalmy J. Tuberculosis case finding: comparison of effectiveness of various roentgenographic and photofluorographic methods. JAMA. 1947;133:359–366
  5. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Carmody DP. Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary tumor detection. Invest Radiol. 1978;13:175–181
  6. Berbaum KS, Franken EA, Dorfman DD, et al.  Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology. Invest Radiol. 1990;25:133–140
  7. Krupinski EA, Nishikawa RM. Comparison of eye position versus computer identified microcalcification clusters on mammograms. Med Phys. 1997;24:17–23
  8. Mello-Thoms C. Perception of breast cancer: eye-position analysis of mammogram interpretation. Acad Radiol. 2003;10:4–12

PII: S1076-6332(03)80781-X

doi: 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80781-X

Academic Radiology
Volume 10, Issue 1 , Pages 1-3 , January 2003

Article Tools