Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 383

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Holistic Component of Image Perception in Mammogram Interpretation: Gaze-tracking Study

Kundel, Harold L., Nodine, Calvin F., Conant, Emily F., Weinstein, Susan P.·2007·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that rapid and accurate performance of the proficient observer in mammogram interpretation involves a shift in the mechanism of image perception from a relatively slow search-to-find mode to a relatively fast holistic mode. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval, and participant informed consent was obtained; patient informed consent was not required. The eye positions of three full-time mammographers, one attending radiologist, two mammography fellows, and three radiology residents were recorded during the interpretation of 20 normal and 20 subtly abnormal mammograms. The search time required to first locate a cancer, as well as the initial eye scan path, was determined and compared with diagnostic performance as measured with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: The median time for all observers to fixate a cancer, regardless of the decision outcome, was 1.13 seconds, with a range of 0.68 second to 3.06 seconds. Even though most of the lesions were fixated, recognition of them as cancerous ranged from 85% (17 of 20) to 10% (two of 20), with corresponding areas under the ROC curve of 0.87-0.40. The ROC index of detectability, d(a), was linearly related to the time to first fixate a cancer with a correlation (r(2)) of 0.81. CONCLUSION: The rapid initial fixation of a true abnormality is evidence for a global perceptual process capable of analyzing the visual input of the entire retinal image and pinpointing the spatial location of an abnormality. It appears to be more highly developed in the most proficient observers, replacing the less efficient initial search-to-find strategies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2422051997

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 383

Metadata

Authors
Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F., Conant, E. F., & Weinstein, S. P.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2007-02
Volume
242
Issue
2
Pages
396-402
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2136024742
Cited by
383
References
0
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Holistic Component of Image Perception in Mammogram Interpretation: Gaze-tracking Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2422051997
The paper
Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F., Conant, E. F., & Weinstein, S. P. (2007). Holistic Component of Image Perception in Mammogram Interpretation: Gaze-tracking Study. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2422051997

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.