Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Evaluation of mammographic image quality: pilot study comparing five methods.

C B Caldwell1, E K Fishell, R A Jong

  • 1Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
|August 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary

Evaluating mammographic image quality is crucial. This study found that phantom-based assessments showed better observer agreement than patient-based assessments, with no significant correlation between different quality evaluation methods.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Breast cancer screening policy-good science should trump bad politics.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)·2020
Same author

Three-dimensional tumor visualization of invasive breast carcinomas using whole-mount serial section histopathology: implications for tumor size assessment.

Breast cancer research and treatment·2019
Same author

Factors influencing survival among patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer treated with trastuzumab.

Breast cancer research and treatment·2018
Same author

Cost-effectiveness analysis of whole-mount pathology processing for patients with early breast cancer undergoing breast conservation.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)·2016
Same author

Point: Mammography screening-sticking to the science.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)·2015
Same author

A task-based quality control metric for digital mammography.

Physics in medicine and biology·2014

Area of Science:

  • Radiology
  • Medical Imaging
  • Quality Assurance

Background:

  • High-quality radiographs are essential for accurate medical diagnoses, particularly in mammography.
  • Assessing mammographic image quality is complex, with various methods lacking clear correlation or optimal meaningfulness.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare five distinct methods for evaluating mammographic image quality.
  • To assess the intra- and interobserver variability and correlations between these evaluation methods.

Main Methods:

  • Five methods were used to rank 11 mammographic system configurations.
  • Subjective rankings by radiologists and physicists using phantom images and patient mammograms.
  • Objective measurements including densitometric contrast and mean glandular radiation dose.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • All methods demonstrated high intraobserver consistency.
  • Phantom-based image quality rankings showed better interobserver agreement than patient-based rankings.
  • No significant correlation was found between any of the five image quality evaluation methods.

Conclusions:

  • Phantom scores may not directly correlate with subjective image quality from patient mammograms.
  • Radiologist assessment of patient mammogram quality can vary significantly, especially with small sample sizes.
  • Findings have implications for mammography accreditation programs regarding image quality assessment standardization.