Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography: The importance of the question and the critical numbers game

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 189, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1142-1144

  Brem, Rachel F ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Computer aided detection; Double reading; Mammography screening; Oncologic imaging; Study design; Women's imaging

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MASSACHUSETTS; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 35648929910     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.3118     Document Type: Note

References (15)

1. Georgian-Smith D, Moore RH, Halpern E, et al. Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography. AJR 2007; 189:1135-1141
2. Sickles EA, Ominsky SH, Sollitto RA, Galvin HB, Monticciolo DL. Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27,114 examinations. Radiology 1990; 175:323-327
3. Brem RF, Baum J, Lechner M, et al. Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trial. AJR 2003; 181:687-693
4. Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D'Orsi CJ, et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection of the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 2000; 215:554-562 [Erratum in Radiology 2000; 216:306]
5. Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 2001; 220:781-786
6. Birdwell RL, Bandodkar P, Ikeda DM. Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology 2005; 236:451-457
7. Cupples TE, Cunningham JE, Reynolds JC. Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program. AJR 2005; 185:944-950
8. Morton MJ, Whaley DH, Brandt KR, Amrami KK. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection - prospective evaluation. Radiology 2006; 239:375-383
9. Dean JC, Ilvento CC. Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers. AJR 2006; 187:20-28
10. Ko JM, Nicholas MJ, Mendel JB, Slanetz PJ. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. AJR 2006; 187:1483-1491
11. Destounis SV, DiNitto P, Logan-Young W, Bonaccio E, Zuley ML, Willison KM. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience. Radiology 2004; 232:578-584
12. Gur D, Sumkin JH, Rockette HE, et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:185-190
13. Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1399-1409
14. Khoo LAL, Taylor P, Given-Wilson RM. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: prospective study. Radiology 2005; 237:444-449
15. Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, McGee MA, et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program. Radiology 2006; 241:47-53