Is face-only photographic view enough for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment?

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2008

Authors

Maria Joao Cardoso (Author) Other; Andre Magalhaes (Author) Other; Teresa Almeida (Author) Other; Susy Costa (Author) Other; Conny Vrieling (Author) Other; David Christie (Author) Other; Jorgen Johansen (Author) Other; Jaime S Cardoso (Author) FEUP

Journal

Title: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Vol. 112 No. 3

Pages: 565-568

ISSN: 0167-6806

Publisher: Springer Nature

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 21 Citations

ISI Web of Science

Scopus - 21 Citations

Scientific classification

FOS: Medical and Health sciences > Clinical medicine

CORDIS: Technological sciences > Engineering > Biomedical enginnering

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-003-TC0

DOI: 10.1007/s10549-008-9896-5

Abstract (EN): The breast cancer conservative treatment. cosmetic results (BCCT. core) is a new software tool created for the automatic and objective evaluation of the aesthetic result of BCCT. It makes use of a face-only photographic view of each patient and might thus have been considered insufficient for an accurate evaluation, as others have used multiple views of each patient. The purpose of this work is to compare the performance of the BCCT. core (using face-only views) with a subjective expert analysis using both the face-only and four-view assessment. Photographs in four-views of 150 patients, were evaluated by a panel of experts and a consensus classification was obtained. The agreement between the consensus and the BCCT. core (face-only view) was calculated using the kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics. Face-only views, of the same 150 patients, were subsequently sorted out in a different order and sent for individual evaluation by three specialists from the previous panel of experts. The individual agreement between the face-only view and the four-view evaluation by each of the three experts and the consensus was calculated using the same methods. Obtained results were compared to the BCCT. core performance. The software obtained a moderate agreement with the consensus (k = 0.57; wk = 0.68). The highest value of agreement, from the three experts, between the four-view evaluation and the consensus was identical to the software agreement (k = 0.55; wk = 0.67). In the face-only view experiment, the highest value of agreement between the experts and the consensus was only fair (k = 0.37; wk = 0.54). Performance of the software was thus considered equal to that obtained by experts using a four-view evaluation.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 4