Standardized reporting for mammography: BI-RADS™

Breast Journal

Volumn 3, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 207-210

  Bassett, Lawrence W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast imaging; Mammography; Reporting system

Indexed keywords

BREAST TUMOR; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAMMOGRAPHY; STANDARDIZATION;

EID: 0030930699     PISSN: 1075122X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.1997.tb00172.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. American Medical Association. Mammographic criteria for surgical biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. Report of the AMA Council on Scientific Affairs. Chicago: American Medical Association, June 21, 1989:9.
2. Homer MJ. The mammography report [editorial]. AJR 1984;142:643-44.
3. Kopans DB. Standardized mammography reporting. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:257-61.
4. Hindle WH. What primary-care docs want in mammo report. Diag Imag Nov 1991;102-3.
5. American College of Radiology (ACR). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS™), 2nd ed. Reston, VA: ACR, 1995.
6. Bassett LW, Hendrick RE, Bassford TL, et al. Quality Determinants of Mammography. Clinical Practice Guideline, N. 13. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0632. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, October 1994.
7. Gold RH, Montgomery CK, Rambo ON. Significance of margination of benign and malignant infiltrative mammary lesions: roentgenologic-pathologic correlation. AJR 1973;118:881-94.
8. Hall FM, Storella JM, Silverstone DZ, Wyshak G. Nonpalpable breast lesions: recommendations for biopsy based on suspicion of carcinoma at mammography. Radiology 1988;167:353-58.
9. Moskowitz M. The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancer. Cancer 1983;51:1007-11.
10. Sickles EA. Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology 1994;192:439-42.
11. Brenner RJ, Sickles EA. Acceptability of periodic follow-up as an alternative to biopsy for mammographically detected lesions interpreted as probably benign. Radiology 1989; 171:645-46.
12. Feig SA. Breast masses: mammographic and sonographic evaluation. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:67-92.
13. Berkowitz JE, Gatewood MB, Gayler BW. Equivocal mammographic findings: evaluation with spot compression. Radiology 1989;171:369-71.
14. Jackson VP, Dines KA, Bassett LW, Gold RH, Reynolds HE. Diagnostic importance of radiographic density of noncalcified breast masses: analysis of 91 lesions. AJR 1991; 157:25-28.
15. Linver MN, Osuch JR, Brenner RJ, et al. Mammography medical audit: primer for the mammography quality standards act (MQSA). AJR 1995;165:19-25.