![](bgc.png)
resentative end users (who are particularly solicited
by their work), and the introduction of non-traditional
interaction techniques.
REFERENCES
(2007). Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-
RADS
R
) atlas. American College of Radiology, Re-
ston, VA, USA, 5 edition.
Bellik, Y., Pruvost, G., Kameas, A., Goumopoulos, C., Ha-
gras, H., Gardner, M., Heinroth, T., and Minker, W.
(2009). Multidimensional pervasive adaptation into
ambient intelligent environments. In Eighth IEEE Int.
Conf. on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Comput-
ing, DASC ’09, pages 303–308. IEEE Comp. Society.
Berg, W. A., D’Orsi, C. J., Jackson, V. P., Bassett, L. W.,
Beam, C. A., Lewis, R. S., and Crewson, P. E. (2002).
Does training in the breast imaging reporting and data
system (bi-rads) improve biopsy recommendations or
feature analysis agreement with experienced breast
imagers at mammography? Radiology, 224(3):871.
Callahan, J., Hopkins, D., Weiser, M., and Shneiderman,
B. (1988). An empirical comparison of pie vs. linear
menus. ACM.
Cheng, H., Cai, X., Chen, X., Hu, L., and Lou, X. (2003).
Computer-aided detection and classification of micro-
calcifications in mammograms: a survey. Pattern
Recognition, 36(12):2967 – 2991.
Costabile, M., Fogli, D., Fresta, G., Mussio, P., and Pic-
cinno, A. (2003). Computer environments for improv-
ing end-user accessibility. In Universal Access Theo-
retical Perspectives, Practice, and Experience, pages
129–140, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer.
Coyette, A., Kieffer, S., and Vanderdonckt, J. (2007). Multi-
fidelity prototyping of user interfaces. In Baranauskas,
C., Palanque, P., Abascal, J., and Barbosa, S. D. J.,
editors, Proc. of INTERACT ’07, pages 150–164.
Danli Wang, Guozhong Dai, H. W. S. C. C. (2008).
Scenario-focused development method for a pen-
based user interface: model and applications. The
Journal of Supercomputing, 46:139–149.
Dengler, J., Behrens, S., and Desaga, J. F. (1991). Seg-
mentation of microcalcifications in mammograms. In
Mustererkennung 1991, pages 380–385. Springer.
Kieffer, S., Coyette, A., and Vanderdonckt, J. (2010). User
interface design by sketching: A complexity analysis
of widget representations. In Proc. of EICS ’10, page
57–66, New York, NY, USA.
Kupinski, M. A. and Giger, M. L. (1998). Automated
seeded lesion segmentation on digital mammograms.
IEEE Trans. on Medical Imaging, 17(4):510–517.
Lewis, J. R. (2006). Sample sizes for usability tests: Mostly
math, not magic. interactions, 13(6):29–33.
Montero, F., L
´
opez-Jaquero, V., Vanderdonckt, J.,
Gonz
´
alez, P., Lozano, M., and Limbourg, Q. (2006).
Solving the mapping problem in user interface design
by seamless integration in IdealXML. In Proc. of
DSV-IS’2006, pages 161–172.
Moyle, M. and Cockburn, A. (2002). Analysing mouse and
pen flick gestures. In Proc. of the Symp. on Comp.-
Human Int., CHINZ ’02, page 19–24.
Nielsen, J. and Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of
user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Confer-
ence on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI
’90, page 249–256, New York, NY, USA. Association
for Computing Machinery.
Organisation, I. S. (2018). ISO 9241-11:2018 – Ergonomics
of human-system interaction — Part 11: Usability:
Definitions and concepts. ISO/TC 159/SC 4 Er-
gonomics of human-system interaction.
Pawloski, P. A., Brooks, G. A., Nielsen, M. E., and Olson-
Bullis1, B. A. (2019). A systematic review of clinical
decision support systems for clinical oncology prac-
tice. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer
Network, 17(4):331–338.
Perry N., Broeders M., d. W. C. T. S. H. R. v. K. L. P. E.
(2006). European Guidelines for Quality Assurance
in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Office for
Official Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg, 4 edition.
Rosson, M. B. and Carroll, J. M. (2002). Scenario-Based
Design, page 1032–1050. L. Erlbaum Associates.
Ruthven, I. and Lalmas, M. (2003). A survey on the use
of relevance feedback for information access systems.
Knowl. Eng. Rev., 18(2):95–145.
Sainfort, F., J. J. E. P. and Booske, B. (2017). Human-
Computer Interaction in Healthcare, volume Design-
ing for Diverse Users and Domains, pages 137–154.
Sefelin, R., Tscheligi, M., and Giller, V. (2003). Paper pro-
totyping - what is it good for? a comparison of paper-
and computer-based low-fidelity prototyping. In Ex-
tended Abstracts, CHI EA ’03, page 778–779. ACM.
Simonin, J., Kieffer, S., and Carbonell, N. (2005). Effects of
display layout on gaze activity during visual search. In
Proc. of INTERACT ’05, pages 1054–1057. Springer.
Skaane, P. and Skjennald, A. (2004). Screen-film mam-
mography versus full-field digital mammography with
soft-copy reading: Randomized trial in a population-
based screening program—the oslo ii study. Radiol-
ogy, 232(1):197–204. PMID: 15155893.
Vanderdonckt, J., Magrofuoco, N., Kieffer, S., P
´
erez, J.,
Rase, Y., Roselli, P., and Villarreal, S. (2019). Head
and shoulders gestures: Exploring user-defined ges-
tures with upper body. In Proc. of HCI Int.’2019,
pages 192–213, Cham.
Vanderdonckt, J., Roselli, P., and P
´
erez-Medina, J. L.
(2018). !FTL, an articulation-invariant stroke gesture
recognizer with controllable position, scale, and ro-
tation invariances. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM
Int. Conf. on Multimodal Interaction, ICMI ’18, page
125–134. ACM.
Vinnicombe, S., Pinto Pereira, S. M., McCormack, V. A.,
Shiel, S., Perry, N., and dos Santos Silva, I. M. (2009).
Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography:
Comparison within the uk breast screening program
and systematic review of published data. Radiology,
251(2):347–358. PMID: 19401569.
Wittenberg, T., Elter, M., and Schulz-Wendtland, R. (2007).
Complete digital iconic and textual annotation for
mammography. In Bildverarbeitung f
¨
ur die Medizin
2007, pages 91–95. Springer.
Zheng, Y., Wu, M., Cole, E., and Pisano, E. D. (2004). On-
line annotation tool for digital mammography. Aca-
demic Radiology, 11(5):566 – 572.
User-centred Development of a Clinical Decision-support System for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Reporting based on Stroke Gestures
71