Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography in a community practice: Are there differences between specialists and general radiologists?

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 188, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 236-241

  Leung, Jessica W T ^a   Margolin, Frederick R ^b   Dee, Katherine E ^c   Jacobs, Richard P ^b   Denny, Susan R ^b   Schrumpf, John D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Western Radiology Associates   (United States)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Breast; Breast cancer; Mammography; Screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMMUNITY CARE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RADIOLOGIST;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RADIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPECIALTIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33845734130     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.05.1581     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:282-290
2. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Howard DH. Does diagnostic accuracy in mammography depend on radiologist experience? J Womens Health 1998; 7:443-449
3. Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C, et al. Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:321-323
4. Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL, et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. JAMA 2003; 290:2129-2137
5. Kan L, Olivotto IA, Warren Burhenne LJ, Sickles EA, Coldman AJ. Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program. Radiology 2000; 215:563-567
6. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994; 331:1493-1499
7. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists: findings from a national sample. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156:209-213
8. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Factors affecting radiologist inconsistency in screening mammography. Acad Radiol 2002; 9:531-540
9. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology 2002; 224:861-869
10. Bassett LW, Hendrick RE, Bassford TL, et al. Quality determinants of mammography. Clinical practice guideline no. 13. AHCPR publication no. 95-0632. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services, October 1994:83
11. United States Food and Drug Administration. Quality mammography standards: final rule: 21 CFR parts 16 and 900. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1997
12. Monsees BS. The Mammography Quality Standards Act: an overview of the regulations and guidance. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:759-772
13. American College of Radiology. Mammography. In: ACR breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) breast imaging atlas, 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
14. American Joint Committee on Cancer. Manual for staging of cancer, 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1997
15. Dee KE, Sickles EA. Medical audit of diagnostic mammography examinations: comparison with screening outcomes obtained concurrently. AJR 2001; 176:729-733
16. Robertson CL. A private breast imaging practice: medical audit of 25,788 screening and 1,077 diagnostic examinations. Radiology 1993; 187:75-79
17. Guenin MA. Generalists versus specialists in mammography. (letter) Radiology 2003; 227:609
18. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE. Generalists versus specialists in mammography. (letter) Radiology 2003; 227:609-611
19. Farria DM, Monsees B. Screening mammography practice essentials. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:831-843
20. Kopans DB. Double reading. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:719-724
21. Ries LAG, Harkins D, Krapcho M, et al., eds. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2003. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 2006. Available at: seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2003. Accessed November 2005
22. Margolin FR, Leung JWT, Jacobs RP, Denny SR. Percutaneous imaging-guided core breast biopsy: 5 years' experience in a community hospital. AJR 2001; 177:559-564