Design of a study to improve accuracy in reading mammograms

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 50, Issue 12, 1997, Pages 1327-1338

  Pepe, Margaret Sullivan ^a   Urban, Nicole ^a   Rutter, Carolyn ^b   Longton, Gary ^a  

^a Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and University of Washington   (United States)

^b CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer simulation; Diagnostic tests; Roc curves; Screening; Sensitivity and specificity

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SAMPLE; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

EID: 0031453019     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00204-7     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Miller AB, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Prorok PC Report on a workshop of the UICC Project on Evaluation of Screening for Cancer. Int J Cancer. 46:1990;761-769.
2. Rakowski W, Andersen MR, Stoddard AM, Urban N, Rimer BK, Lane DS, Fox SA, Costanza ME for the NCI Breast Cancer Screening Consortium A confirmatory analysis of the pros and cons of mammography. Health Psychol. 16:1997;433-441.
3. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR Variability in radiologist's interpretation of mammograms. N Engl J Med. 331:1994;1493-1499.
4. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample Arch Int Med. 156:1996;209-213.
5. Begg CB Advances in statistical methodology for diagnostic medicine in the 1980's. Stat Med. 10:1991;1887-1895.
6. Begg CB, McNeil BJ Assessment of radiologic tests. Control of bias and other design considerations Radiology. 167:1988;565-569.
7. Gatsonis C, McNeil BJ Collaborative evaluations of diagnostic tests. Experience of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group Radiology. 175:1990;571-575.
8. American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 2:1995;American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia.
9. Advances in Statistical Methods for Diagnostic Radiology. A Symposium Academic Radiology. 2:1995;S1.
10. Dorfman DD, Alf E Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory and determination of confidence intervals. Rating method data J Mathematical Psychol. 6:1969;487-496.
11. Swets JA, Pickett RM Evaluation of Diagnostic Systems. Methods from Signal Detection Theory:1982;Academic Press, New York.
12. Metz CE ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Invest Radiol. 21:1986;720-733.
13. Kopans DB The accuracy of mammographic interpretations. N Engl J Med. 331:1994;1521-1522.
14. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ The meaning and use of the area under operating characteristics curve. Radiology. 143:1982;29-36.
15. Johnson RA, Wichern DW Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. 1988;Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
16. SER Corporation EGRET Siz Module. 1997;Cytel Software Corporation, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
17. Leisenring W, Pepe MS, Longton GL A marginal regression modelling framework for evaluating medical diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 16:1997;1263-1281.