Is radiologists' volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 60, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 623-626

  Moss, Sue M ^a   Blanks, R G ^a   Bennett, R L ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast radiography; Cancer screening; Radiology reporting

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATION; CANADA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EXPERIENCE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; ITALY; JOB PERFORMANCE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDLINE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; WORK CAPACITY; WORKLOAD;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RADIOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WORKLOAD;

EID: 22144439035     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2005.01.011     Document Type: Review

References (11)

1. NHS Breast Screening Radiologists Quality Assurance Committee Quality assurance guidelines for radiologists 1997 NHSBSP Publications Sheffield, UK
2. Perry N, Broeders M, Wolf C de, Törnberg S, eds. European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening. 3rd Ed. Luxembourg, European Commission, Europe Against Cancer programme, 2001.
3. R. Smith-Bindman P.W. Chu D.L. Miglioretti E.A. Sickles R. Blanks R. Ballard-Barbashh et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom JAMA 290 2003 2129-2137
4. C. Beam E. Conant E.A. Sickles Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation J Natl Cancer Inst 95 2003 282-290
5. J. Elmore C. Wells D. Howard Does diagnostic accuracy in mammography depend on radiologists' experience? J Womens Health 7 1998 443-449
6. L. Esserman H. Cowley C. Eberle A. Kirkpatrick S. Chang K. Berbaum et al. Improving the accuracy of mammography: Volume and outcome relationships J Natl Cancer Inst 94 2002 369-375
7. L. Kan I.A. Olivotto L.J. Warren Burhenne E.A. Sickles A.J. Coldman Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program Radiology 215 2000 563-567
8. S. Ciatto D. Ambrogetti S. Catarzi D. Morrone M. Rosselli Del Turco Proficiency test for screening mammography: Results for 117 volunteer Italian radiologists J Med Screen 6 1999 149-151
9. T.K. Egglin A.R. Feinstein Context bias. A problem in diagnostic radiology JAMA 276 1996 17525
10. R.G. Blanks R.M. Given-Wilson S.M. Moss Efficiency of cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening: Two versus one view mammography J Med Screen 5 1998 141-145
11. Gale AG. PERFORMS - a self assessment scheme for radiologists in breast screening. In Seminars in Breast Disease: Improving and monitoring mammographic interpretative skills, 2003;6:148-152.