Computer aided diagnosis (CAD) of breast mass on ultrasonography and scintimammography

Author(s):  
Kyung-Hoon Hwang ◽  
Jun Gu Lee ◽  
Jong Hyo Kim ◽  
Hyung-Ji Lee ◽  
Kyong-Sik Om ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 751-763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuchen Qiu ◽  
Shiju Yan ◽  
Rohith Reddy Gundreddy ◽  
Yunzhi Wang ◽  
Samuel Cheng ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Myung Chul Chang ◽  
Chan Dong Kim ◽  
Hye Rin Roh ◽  
Gi Bong Chae ◽  
Dae Hyun Yang ◽  
...  

Radiology ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 244 (2) ◽  
pp. 390-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan L. Jesneck ◽  
Joseph Y. Lo ◽  
Jay A. Baker

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (01) ◽  
pp. 1950007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Mohammad Alqudah ◽  
Huda M. S. Algharib ◽  
Amal M. S. Algharib ◽  
Hanan M. S. Algharib

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer type that is diagnosed in women. The exact causes of such cancer are still unknown. Early and precise detection of breast cancer using mammogram images or biopsy to provide the required medications can increase the healing percentage. There are much current research efforts to developed a computer aided diagnosis (CAD) system based on mammogram images for detecting and classification of breast masses. In this research, a CAD system is developed for automated segmentation and two-stages classification of breast masses. The first stage includes the classification of the masses into seven classes (normal, calcification, circumscribed, spiculated, ill-defined, architectural distortion, asymmetry), which is done using probabilistic neural network (PNN). The second classification stage is to define the severity of abnormality into two classes (Benign and Malignant) which were done using support vector machine (SVM). The results of applying the proposed method on two mammogram image show that the accuracy of detection and segmentation of the breast mass was 99.8% for mammographic image analysis society database (MIAS-DB) with 322 images and 97.5% for breast cancer digital repository (BCDR), BCDR-F03 and BCDR-DN01 with 936 images, while for the first classification stage has accuracy of 97.08%, sensitivity of 98.30% and specificity of 89.8%, and the second classification stage has an accuracy of 99.18%, sensitivity of 98.42% and specificity of 94.90%.


Author(s):  
Maryellen L. Giger ◽  
Zhimin Huo ◽  
Dulcy E. Wolverton ◽  
Carl J. Vyborny ◽  
Catherine Moran ◽  
...  

1972 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 32-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. T. DE DOMBAL ◽  
J. C. HORROCKS ◽  
J. R. STANILAND ◽  
P. J. GUILLOU

This paper describes a series of 10,500 attempts at »pattern-recognition« by two groups of humans and a computer based system. There was little difference between the performances of 11 clinicians and 11 other persons of comparable intellectual capability. Both groups’ performances were related to the pattern-size, the accuracy diminishing rapidly as the patterns grew larger. By contrast the computer system increased its accuracy as the patterns increased in size.It is suggested (a) that clinicians are very little better than others at pattem-recognition, (b) that the clinician is incapable of analysing on a probabilistic basis the data he collects during a traditional clinical interview and examination and (c) that the study emphasises once again a major difference between human and computer performance. The implications as - regards human- and computer-aided diagnosis are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document