ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Automated assessment of task-based performance of digital mammography and tomosynthesis systems using an anthropomorphic breast phantom and deep learning-based scoring.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Introduction to the Special Issue: Celebrating Digital Tomosynthesis-Past, Present, and Future.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Conventional metrics used for assessing digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) image quality, including noise, spatial resolution, and detective quantum efficiency, do not necessarily predict how well the system will perform in a clinical task. A number of existing phantom-based methods have their own limitations, such as unrealistic uniform backgrounds, subjective scoring using humans, and regular signal patterns unrepresentative of common clinical findings. We attempted to address this problem with a realistic breast phantom with random hydroxyapatite microcalcifications and semi-automated deep learning-based image scoring. Our goal was to develop a methodology for objective task-based assessment of image quality for tomosynthesis and DM systems, which includes an anthropomorphic phantom, a detection task (microcalcification clusters), and automated performance evaluation using a convolutional neural network. Approach: Experimental 2D and pseudo-3D mammograms of an anthropomorphic inkjet-printed breast phantom with inserted microcalcification clusters were collected on clinical mammography systems to train a signal-present/signal-absent image classifier based on Resnet-18 architecture. In a separate validation study using simulations, this Resnet-18 classifier was shown to approach the performance of an ideal observer. Microcalcification detection performance was evaluated as a function of four dose levels using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis [i.e., area under the ROC curve (AUC)]. To demonstrate the use of this evaluation approach for assessing different technologies, the method was applied to two different mammography systems, as well as to mammograms with re-binned pixels emulating a lower-resolution X-ray detector. Results: Microcalcification detectability, as assessed by the deep learning classifier, was observed to vary with the exposure incident on the breast phantom for both DM and tomosynthesis. At full dose, experimental AUC was 0.96 (for DM) and 0.95 (for DBT), whereas at half dose, it dropped to 0.85 and 0.71, respectively. AUC performance on DM was significantly decreased with an effective larger pixel size obtained with re-binning. The task-based assessment approach also showed the superiority of a newer mammography system compared with an older system. Conclusions: An objective task-based methodology for assessing the image quality of mammography and tomosynthesis systems is proposed. Possible uses for this tool could be quality control, acceptance, and constancy testing, assessing the safety and effectiveness of new technology for regulatory submissions, and system optimization. The results from this study showed that the proposed evaluation method using a deep learning model observer can track differences in microcalcification signal detectability with varied exposure conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.