Informatics in Radiology: What Can You See in a Single Glance and How Might This Guide Visual Search in Medical Images?

References

• 1 Palmer SE. Modern theories of gestalt perception. Mind Lang 1990;5(4):289–323.
  Google Scholar
• 2 Kundel HL, Nodine CF. Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search. Radiology 1975;116(3):527–532.
  Google Scholar
• 3 Fei-Fei L, Iyer A, Koch C, Perona P. What do we perceive in a glance of a real-world scene? J Vis 2007;7(1):10.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 4 Greene MR, Oliva A. The briefest of glances: the time course of natural scene understanding. Psychol Sci 2009;20(4):464–472.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 5 Intraub H. Rapid conceptual identification of sequentially presented pictures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1981;7(3):604–610.
  Google Scholar
• 6 Potter MC. Short-term conceptual memory for pictures. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn 1976;2(5): 509–522.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 7 Rousselet GA, Joubert OR, Fabre-Thorpe M. How long to get to the “gist” of real-world natural scenes? Vis Cogn 2005;12(6):852–877.
  Google Scholar
• 8 Wolfe JM, Võ ML, Evans KK, Greene MR. Visual search in scenes involves selective and nonselective pathways. Trends Cogn Sci 2011;15(2):77–84.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 9 Chong SC, Treisman A. Representation of statistical properties. Vision Res 2003;43(4):393–404.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 10 Parkes L, Lund J, Angelucci A, Solomon JA, Morgan M. Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nat Neurosci 2001;4(7):739–744.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 11 Williams DW, Sekuler R. Coherent global motion percepts from stochastic local motions. Vision Res 1984;24(1):55–62.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 12 Tsotsos JK. A computational perspective on visual attention. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2011.
  Google Scholar
• 13 Krupinski EA. Future of medical image perception. In: Samei EKrupinski EA, eds. The handbook of medical image perception and techniques. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2010; 413–416.
  Google Scholar
• 14 Evans KK, Horowitz TS, Wolfe JM. When categories collide: accumulation of information about multiple categories in rapid scene perception. Psychol Sci 2011;22(6):739–746.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 15 Wolfe JM. What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychol Sci 1998;9(1):33–39.
  Google Scholar
• 16 Kundel HL, La Follette PS. Visual search patterns and experience with radiological images. Radiology 1972;103(3):523–528.
  Google Scholar
• 17 Chun MM, Jiang Y. Contextual cueing: implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognit Psychol 1998;36(1):28–71.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 18 Krupinski EA. Visual scanning patterns of radiologists searching mammograms. Acad Radiol 1996;3(2):137–144.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 19 Krupinski EA, Tillack AA, Richter L, et al.. Eye-movement study and human performance using telepathology virtual slides: implications for medical education and differences with experience. Hum Pathol 2006;37(12):1543–1556.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 20 Reingold EM, Charness N, Pomplun M, Stampe DM. Visual span in expert chess players: evidence from eye movements. Psychol Sci 2001;12(1): 48–55.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 21 Gobet F, Simon HA. Templates in chess memory: a mechanism for recalling several boards. Cognit Psychol 1996;31(1):1–40.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 22 Reingold EM, Sheridan H. Eye movements and visual expertise in chess and medicine. In: Liversedge SPGilchrist IDEverling S, eds. Oxford handbook on eye movement. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2011; 528–550.
  Google Scholar
• 23 Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Conant EF, Weinstein SP. Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation: gaze-tracking study. Radiology 2007;242(2):396–402.
  Google Scholar
• 24 Chase WG, Simon HA. Perception in chess. Cognit Psychol 1973;4(1):55–81.
  Google Scholar
• 25 Egeth HE, Virzi RA, Garbart H. Searching for conjunctively defined targets. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1984;10(1):32–39.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 26 Wolfe JM, Horowitz TS. What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nat Rev Neurosci 2004;5(6):495–501.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 27 Swensson RG. A 2-stage detection model applied to skilled visual-search by radiologists. Percept Psychophys 1980;27(1):11–16.
  Google Scholar
• 28 Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Thickman D, Toto L. Searching for lung nodules: a comparison of human performance with random and systematic scanning models. Invest Radiol 1987;22(5):417–422.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 29 Aguirre GK, Zarahn E, D’Esposito M. Neural components of topographical representation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95(3):839–846.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 30 Epstein R, Graham KS, Downing PE. Viewpoint-specific scene representations in human parahippocampal cortex. Neuron 2003;37(5):865–876.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 31 Haxby JV, Gobbini MI, Furey ML, Ishai A, Schouten JL, Pietrini P. Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science 2001;293(5539):2425–2430.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 32 Epstein R, Kanwisher N. A cortical representation of the local visual environment. Nature 1998;392(6676):598–601.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 33 Carmody DP, Nodine CF, Kundel HL. Finding lung nodules with and without comparative visual scanning. Percept Psychophys 1981;29(6):594–598.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 34 Oestmann JW, Greene R, Kushner DC, Bourgouin PM, Linetsky L, Llewellyn HJ. Lung lesions: correlation between viewing time and detection. Radiology 1988;166(2):451–453.
  Google Scholar
• 35 Mugglestone MD, Gale AG, Cowley HC, Wilson AR. Diagnostic performance on briefly presented mammographic images. Proc SPIE 1995;2436: 106–115.
  Google Scholar
• 36 Evans KK, Georgian-Smith D, Birdwell RL, Wolfe JM. Discrimination and localization of abnormalities in mammograms from a global signal [abstr]. In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2010; 438.
  Google Scholar
• 37 Nodine CF, Mello-Thoms C. The role of expertise in radiologic image interpretation. In: Samei EKrupinski EA, eds. The handbook of medical image perception and techniques. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2010; 139–156.
  Google Scholar
• 38 Greene MR, Oliva A. Recognition of natural scenes from global properties: seeing the forest without representing the trees. Cognit Psychol 2009;58(2): 137–176.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 39 Joubert OR, Rousselet GA, Fize D, Fabre-Thorpe M. Processing scene context: fast categorization and object interference. Vision Res 2007;47(26): 3286–3297.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 40 Evans KK, Treisman A. Perception of objects in natural scenes: is it really attention free? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2005;31(6):1476–1492.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 41 Thorpe S, Fize D, Marlot C. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 1996;381(6582): 520–522.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 42 Macé MJ, Delorme A, Richard G, Fabre-Thorpe M. Spotting animals in natural scenes: efficiency of humans and monkeys at very low contrasts. Anim Cogn 2010;13(3):405–418.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 43 Guyonneau R, Kirchner H, Thorpe SJ. Animals roll around the clock: the rotation invariance of ultrarapid visual processing. J Vis 2006;6(10):1008–1017.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 44 Rousselet GA, Macé MJ, Fabre-Thorpe M. Is it an animal? Is it a human face? Fast processing in upright and inverted natural scenes. J Vis 2003;3(6): 440–455.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 45 Delorme A, Richard G, Fabre-Thorpe M. Ultra-rapid categorisation of natural scenes does not rely on colour cues: a study in monkeys and humans. Vision Res 2000;40(16):2187–2200.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 46 Thorpe SJ, Gegenfurtner KR, Fabre-Thorpe M, Bülthoff HH. Detection of animals in natural images using far peripheral vision. Eur J Neurosci 2001; 14(5):869–876.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 47 Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Carmody D. Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. Invest Radiol 1978;13(3):175–181.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 48 Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Krupinski EA. Searching for lung nodules: visual dwell indicates locations of false-positive and false-negative decisions. Invest Radiol 1989;24(6):472–478.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 49 Krupinski EA, Lund PJ. Scanning differences in film versus monitor viewing of radiographs [abstr]. Radiology 1996;201(P):789.
  Google Scholar
• 50 Manning D, Barker-Mill SC, Donovan T, Crawford T. Time-dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule detection. Br J Radiol 2006;79(940): 342–346.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 51 Castelhano MS, Heaven C. The relative contribution of scene context and target features to visual search in scenes. Atten Percept Psychophys 2010;72(5):1283–1297.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 52 Võ ML, Wolfe JM. When does repeated search in scenes involve memory? Looking at versus looking for objects in scenes. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2012;38(1):23–41.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 53 Torralba A, Oliva A, Castelhano MS, Henderson JM. Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: the role of global features in object search. Psychol Rev 2006;113(4): 766–786.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 54 Võ ML, Henderson JM. The time course of initial scene processing for eye movement guidance in natural scene search. J Vis 2010;10(3):14.1–13.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 55 Castelhano MS, Henderson JM. Initial scene representations facilitate eye movement guidance in visual search. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2007;33(4):753–763.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 56 Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Toto L. Searching for lung nodules: the guidance of visual scanning. Invest Radiol 1991;26(9):777–781.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 57 Foulsham T, Alan R, Kingstone A. Scrambled eyes? Disrupting scene structure impedes focal processing and increases bottom-up guidance. Atten Percept Psychophys 2011;73(7):2008–2025.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 58 Nodine CF, Krupinski EA. Perceptual skill, radiology expertise, and visual test performance with NINA and WALDO. Acad Radiol 1998;5(9): 603–612.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 59 Evans KK, Cohen MA, Tambouret R, Horowitz T, Kreindel E, Wolfe JM. Does visual expertise improve visual recognition memory? Atten Percept Psychophys 2011;73(1):30–35.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 60 Andriole KP, Wolfe JM, Khorasani R, et al.. Optimizing analysis, visualization, and navigation of large image data sets: one 5000-section CT scan can ruin your whole day. Radiology 2011;259(2):346–362.
  Google Scholar
• 61 Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Mello-Thoms C, et al.. How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Acad Radiol 1999;6(10):575–585.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 62 Sagi D. Perceptual learning in vision research. Vision Res 2011;51(13):1552–1566.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 63 Sowden PT, Davies IR, Roling P. Perceptual learning of the detection of features in x-ray images: a functional role for improvements in adults’ visual sensitivity? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2000;26(1):379–390.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 64 Pauli R, Sowden PT. The role of feedback in learning screening mammography. Proc SPIE 1997;3036: 205–211.
  Google Scholar
• 65 Tversky A, Kahneman D. Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognit Psychol 1973;5(2):207–232.
  Google Scholar