The early evidence is very
promising,” explains Dr. Ashish Chawla, the Medical Director of Radiation
Oncology at Inova Fair Oaks Hospital (Virginia). “It appears that 3-D mammogram
reduces the need for additional call backs after initial screening and may
reduce the frequency of biopsies. If this evidence holds up, 3-D mammogram may
become the standard of care in the future.”
This advanced Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)-approved technology produces multiple x-ray images to
create a three-dimensional picture of the breast. A regular digital mammogram
collects only a single image. Radiologists and doctors view more details and
multiple image pictures with the 3-D option, which enables them to better
understand the problems or lack thereof within the breast. Studies show
women return less often for additional images after undergoing the 3-D exam.
The early mammograms (1960s) were performed with x-ray tubes
and the breasts were not compressed; they were similar to chest x-rays, but low
in contrast. The science evolved to screen-film mammograms, which provided
advance contrast and the ability for increased visibility through the breast
tissues.
Health professionals agree the
high-quality mammograms available today “are the most effective tool available
to detect breast cancer before lumps can be felt or other symptoms appear.
Early detection of breast cancer not only provides a woman with more treatment
options, but it also increases the chance of having the best possible clinical
outcome.”
Dr. Etta Pisano is
leading a five-year
clinical trial comparing the types of mammography to
evaluate whether the new technology reduces the risk that women will develop
life-threatening cancers. She explains some “mammography systems require
both 2-D and 3-D X-rays, which can expose women to twice as much radiation.
Other systems … generate a 2-D image from the 3-D version with software,
eliminating the extra exposure. The 2-D image is important because clusters of
calcifications, which may signal breast cancer, might be easier to see on the
2-D image.”
The advancement to 3-D technology increases the odds of
early tumor and cancer detection. It does not reduce the pain associated with
the compression of the breast. But most will agree that a few minutes of
discomfort is certainly worth the gain.
About Our Author
Grace
Aspinall was born and raised in Williamstown, Massachusetts where she was a
freelance journalist, photo-journalist and photographer for many years. Grace
has a Bachelor’s Degree in English from Skidmore College and Master’s of Arts
in Corporate Communications from Norwich University. During her years in Metro
Washington DC she exhibits her talent for technical writing on numerous
government contracts.
~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~ Fictional
Team Execution Plan (TEP)
Abstract
The Architecture team engineers the creation of the US Armed
Services (USAS) Unit of Action (UA) System of Systems (SoS) architecture
approach and the process used to develop the USAS architecture. The purpose of the USAS UA Architecture
process is to serve as an integral element of the System Engineering (SE)
process through all its phases. The UA
Architecture, including the software architecture views, facilitates the
requirements analysis, functional analysis, system analysis, allocation and the
synthesis activities.
The Architect team engineers the creation of the United
States Armed Services (USAS) Equipped Unit of Action (UA) System of Systems
(SoS) architecture approach and the process used to develop the USAS
architecture. This is the future
architecture of the United States Government’s UA when equipped with the USAS. The architecture describes the structure of USAS force, system and
activity elements, their relationships and the principles and guidelines
governing their design and evolution over time.
The purpose of the USAS UA Architecture process is to serve as an
integral element of the System Engineering (SE) process through all its
phases. The UA Architecture, including
the software architecture views, facilitates the requirements analysis,
functional analysis, system analysis, allocation and the synthesis activities. It is an integral part of all of these and
flows down from the SoS level to the suppliers.
It produces the full architecture description and documentation that
provide a framework, overarching constraints and focus for the subsequent
development and documentation of a design for all the system variations that
support the needs of the user community.
In support of the SE process, it informs the product developers and
engineering specialties with the description of USAS components, interfaces,
relationships and constraints required to achieve an open system architecture
possessing attributes such as scalability, flexibility and robustness. It contributes to achievement of effective
interoperability with external Unit of Employment (UE) and Joint Systems.
The Government has defined the Doctrine, Goals and Vision
for the USAS in the Operational and Organizational (O&O) Plan and the
Operational Requirements Document (ORD).
The Lead System Integrator (LSI) in collaboration with the Government
and Industry is charged to bring these Doctrines, Goals and Visions to
fruition.
The Chief Scientist and Architect oversee a support team
responsible for documentation and guidance for the Chief Architects’ Network
(CAN), which includes representatives from USAS integrated product teams (IPTs)
including USAS members and government counterparts. The team works with the customer requirements
and translates them into activity diagrams and use cases consistent with the
overall SoS, System Views and Technical Views.
Accountability
· USAS
Program Manager’s Office (PMO)
Authority
Member LSI PMO
·
Member Program Change Control Board (PCCB)
·
Member Change Control Board (CCB)
·
Member of Program Manager (PM) One Team Council
·
Member of Technical Integration Board (TIB)
·
Member
of PM’s Executive Council
·
Member
of Program Review Board and Technical Review Board
·
Member
Transition Review Board (TRB)
·
Review
and Approval Authority for System of Systems Architecture and Specification
·
Review
and Approval Authority for customer-deliverable documents pertaining to Science
& Technology (S&T) maturity, technology program maturation and
industrial base strategies.
· Review
and Approval Authority for Simulation Support Plan and Test and Evaluation
Master Plan
This Team Execution Plan (TEP) is a ‘living document” which
will be updated as required to capture significant changes in a timely manner.
In addition, it will be reviewed annually on its approval anniversary date by
the Chief Scientist and Architect to ensure currency and updated as needed.
Updates will be coordinated and approved as determined by the Chief Scientist
and Architect team members, depending upon their nature.
