Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists: Findings from a national sample

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 156, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 209-213

  Beam, Craig A ^a   Layde, Peter M ^a   Sullivan, Daniel C ^b,c  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST;

BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; OBSERVER VARIATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030064443     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.156.2.209     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Boyd NF, Wolfson C, Moskowitz M, et al. Observer variation in the interpretation of xeromammograms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1982,68:357-363.
2. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1493-1499.
3. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical Methods. 7th ed. Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University Press, 1980
4. Kopans DB, D'Orsi CJ, Adler DD, et al. American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology; 1993.
5. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
6. Rockette HE, Obuchowski NA, Gur D. Nonparametric estimation of degenerate ROC data sets used for comparison of imaging systems. Invest Radiol. 1990; 25:835-837.
7. Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife Ann Statistics. 1979; 7.1-26.
8. Chamberlain J, Clifford RE, Nathan BE, Price JL, Burn I. Error rates in screening for breast cancer by clinical examination and mammography. Clin Oncol. 1979;5:135-146.
9. Swets JA, Pickett RM. Evaluation of Diagnostic Systems: Methods From Signal Detection Theory Orlando, Fla: Academic Press Inc; 1982.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, October 31, 1991-September 30, 1993. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1994;43:530-534.
11. Morrison AS. Screening for cancer of the breast. Epidemiol Rev. 1993;15:244-255
12. Eddy DM Screening for breast cancer. In: Common Screening Tests. Philadelphia, Pa: American College of Physicians; 1991.229-254
13. Homer MJ. Nonpalpable mammographic abnormalities: timing the follow-up studies AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981;136:923-926.
14. Varas X, Leborgne F, Leborgne JH. Nonpalpable probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography. Radiology. 1992,184:409-414.
15. Feinstein AR. Clinical Epidemiology The Architecture of Clinical Research. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1985.