I read in the New England Journal of Medicine that in many European countries, it is standard for two people to read mammogram films as opposed to having just one person read them as it is practiced in the United States. Having two people read the films obviously increases the chance that something that should be looked at will be caught. However, this can be a time and resource-consuming process. In the New England Journal of Medicine, I saw an article from a group of scientists who wondered if there might be a way to use computers to read the films as a second set of “eyes” instead of another person. If so, can it be as accurate as two sets of human eyeballs?
This study found that the cancer-detection rate (people with definite cancer) was about the same with one person reading with computer aid and with two people reading the films. However, the recall rate (people with suspicious masses that could be cancer) was significantly higher in the single person with computer aid group. I see an up-side and a down-side to these findings. The up-side: Using one person as opposed to two frees up time and resources to read more mammogram films. The down-side: The recall rate is higher, meaning that many people who have benign tumors may be being called back for further testing. This probably uses more time and resources than having two people initially read the scans.
It’s very easy to connect this research with computer-assisted projects like our own item parsing pilot, Lucy, or with our interest in the field of computer simulations in general. Even when results like these seem to break even, it’s important that people are doing this kind of research. We’ll never figure out what technology works best without people experimenting in this field.
For those who are interested in the science-y numbers, check out the article in the New England Journal of Medicine 2008 Oct 16;359(16):1675-84. Epub 2008 Oct 1.
Recent Comments