Shapelet analysis of pupil dilation for modeling visuo-cognitive behavior in screening mammography

Our objective is to improve understanding of visuo-cognitive behavior in screening mammography under clinically equivalent experimental conditions. To this end, we examined pupillometric data, acquired using a head-mounted eye-tracking device, from 10 image readers (three breast-imaging radiologists and seven Radiology residents), and their corresponding diagnostic decisions for 100 screening mammograms. The corpus of mammograms comprised cases of varied pathology and breast parenchymal density. We investigated the relationship between pupillometric fluctuations, experienced by an image reader during mammographic screening, indicative of changes in mental workload, the pathological characteristics of a mammographic case, and the image readers’ diagnostic decision and overall task performance. To answer these questions, we extract features from pupillometric data, and additionally applied time series shapelet analysis to extract discriminative patterns in changes in pupil dilation. Our results show that pupillometric measures are adequate predictors of mammographic case pathology, and image readers’ diagnostic decision and performance with an average accuracy of 80%.

[1]  P. Hancock,et al.  Adaptive control in human-machine systems , 1987 .

[2]  M. Moskowitz,et al.  Breast cancer missed by mammography. , 1979, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  R. E. Yoss,et al.  Pupil size and spontaneous pupillary waves associated with alertness, drowsiness, and sleep , 1970, Neurology.

[4]  H L Kundel,et al.  Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. , 1978, Investigative radiology.

[5]  Wolfram Boucsein,et al.  Combining Skin Conductance and Heart Rate Variability for Adaptive Automation During Simulated IFR Flight , 2007, HCI.

[6]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  Wrappers for Feature Subset Selection , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[7]  M J Schell,et al.  Reassessment of breast cancers missed during routine screening mammography: a community-based study. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine Learning , 1988 .

[9]  D. Vanel.  The American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BI-RADS): a step towards a universal radiological language? , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[10]  S. P. Marshall,et al.  The Index of Cognitive Activity: measuring cognitive workload , 2002, Proceedings of the IEEE 7th Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants.

[11]  Leonard Berlin,et al.  Malpractice Issues in Radiology , 1998 .

[12]  Richard H. Moore,et al.  Current Status of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography , 1998, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[13]  J J Rombach,et al.  Breast cancer screening: all's well that ends well, or much ado about nothing? , 1989, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  J. Beatty.  Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. , 1982 .

[15]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  Understanding changes in mental workload during execution of goal-directed tasks and its application for interruption management , 2008, TCHI.

[16]  Craig A. Beam,et al.  Interpretion error in mammography: taxonomy and measurement , 2003 .

[17]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  Categories & Subject Descriptors: H.5.2 [Information , 2022 .

[18]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  The WEKA data mining software: an update , 2009, SKDD.

[19]  Christopher D Wickens,et al.  Processing Resources in Attention, Dual Task Performance, and Workload Assessment. , 1981 .

[20]  Mats Lind,et al.  Time estimation as a measure of cognitive workload , 2007 .

[21]  P F Judy,et al.  The Medical Image Perception Society. Key issues for image perception research. , 1998, Radiology.

[22]  Jules H Sumkin,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy and recall rates for digital mammography and digital mammography combined with one-view and two-view tomosynthesis: results of an enriched reader study. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[23]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple resources and performance prediction , 2002 .

[24]  Eamonn J. Keogh,et al.  Time series shapelets: a new primitive for data mining , 2009, KDD.

[25]  Gerard Salton,et al.  A vector space model for automatic indexing , 1975, CACM.

[26]  L Berlin.  Errors in judgment. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[27]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. , 2002, Radiology.

[28]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[29]  Ricardo Gutierrez-Osuna,et al.  Removal of subject-dependent and activity-dependent variation in physiological measures of stress , 2012, 2012 6th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth) and Workshops.

[30]  R A Schmidt,et al.  Please be specific. , 1990, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[31]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Cognitive Perspectives of Information Retrieval Interaction: Elements of a Cognitive IR Theory , 1996, J. Documentation.

[32]  R. Bird,et al.  Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. , 1992, Radiology.

[33]  J. Elmore,et al.  Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  E. Hess,et al.  Pupil Size in Relation to Mental Activity during Simple Problem-Solving , 1964, Science.

[35]  B. Levin,et al.  American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer , 2002, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[36]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[37]  Ronald K. Pearson,et al.  Outliers in process modeling and identification , 2002, IEEE Trans. Control. Syst. Technol..

[38]  E. Conant,et al.  How experience and training influence mammography expertise. , 1999, Academic radiology.