Does computer-aided detection have a role in the arbitration of discordant double-reading opinions in a breast-screening programme?

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 46-51

  James, J J ^a   Cornford, E J ^a  

^a NOTTINGHAM CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; NEGOTIATING; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 57349087161     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2008.07.008     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Blanks R.G., Wallis M.G., and Moss S.M. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen 5 (1998) 195-201
2. Cornford E.J., Evans A.J., James J.J., et al. The pathological and radiological features of screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed following discordant double reading opinions. Clinical Radiol 60 (2005) 1182-1187
3. Khoo L., Taylor P., and Given-Wilson R.M. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom breast screening programme: prospective study. Radiology 237 (2005) 444-449
4. Gilbert F.J., Astley S.M., McGee M.A., et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom national breast screening program. Radiology 241 (2006) 47-53
5. Fenton J.J., Taplin S.H., Carney P., et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 356 (2007) 1399-1409
6. Bennett R.L., Blanks R.G., and Moss S.M. Does the accuracy of single reading with CAD (computer-aided detection) compare with that of double reading? A review of the literature. Clin Radiol 61 (2006) 1023-1028
7. McNemar Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12 (1947) 153-157
8. Harvey S.C., Geller B., Oppenheimer R.G., et al. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180 (2003) 1461-1467
9. Jiang Y.L., Nishikawa R.M., Schmidt R.A., et al. Improving breast cancer diagnosis with computer-aided diagnosis. Acad Radiol 6 (1999) 22-33
10. Chan H.P., Sahiner B., Helvie M.A., et al. Improvement of radiologists' characterisation of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC study. Radiology 212 (1999) 817-827
11. Veldkamp W.J.H., Karssemeijer N., Otten J.D., et al. Automated classification of clustered microcalcifications into malignant and benign types. Med Phys 27 (2000) 2600-2608
12. Karssemeijer N., Otten J.D.M., Verbeek A.L.M., et al. Computed-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms. Radiology 227 (2003) 192-200
13. Garvican L., and Field S. A pilot evaluation of the R2 Image-Checker system and users' response in the detection of interval breast cancers on previous screening films. Clin Radiol 56 (2001) 833-837
14. Warren Burhenne L.J., Wood S., D'Orsi C., et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 215 (2000) 554-562
15. Ikeda D.M., Birdwell R.L., O'Shaughnessy K.F., et al. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography. Radiology 230 (2004) 811-819
16. Malich A., Marx C., Facius M., et al. Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection system. Eur Radiol 11 (2001) 2454-2459