The positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) as a method of quality assessment in breast imaging in a hospital population

European Radiology

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 1743-1750

  Zonderland, Harmine M ^a   Pope Jr , Thomas L ^b   Nieborg, Arend J ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

BI RADS; Breast cancer; Diagnostic radiology; Mammography; Observer performance; Positive predictive value; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RADIOLOGY DEPARTMENT, HOSPITAL; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 6344243662     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-004-2373-6     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. American College of Radiology (1998) Illustrated breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 3rd edn. American College of Radiology, Reston
2. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC (1999) BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 211:845-850
3. Mendelson EB, Berg WA, Merritt CRB (2001) Toward a standardized breast ultrasound lexicon, BI-RADS: ultrasound. Semin Roentgenol 3:217-225
4. Liberman L, Menell JH (2002) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) Radiol Clin North Am 40:409-430
5. American College of Radiology (2003) Illustrated breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston
6. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y et al (2002) Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:1151-1159
7. Yasmeen S, Romano PS, Pettinger M et al (2003) Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:429-436
8. Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL et al (2003) Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. J Am Med Assoc 290:2129-2137
9. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J et al (1998) Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the ACR breast imaging reporting and data system. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1801-1809
10. Lehman C, Holt S, Peacock S, White E, Urban N (2002) Use of the ACR BI-RADS guidelines by community radiologists: concordance of assessments and recommendations assigned to screening mammograms. Am J Roentgenol 179:15-20
11. Berg WA, D'Orsi CJ, Jackson VP et al (2002) Does training in the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations for feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? Radiology 224:871-880
12. Dee KE, Sickles EA (2001) Medical audit of diagnostic mammography examinations. Comparison with screening outcomes obtained concurrently. Am J Roentgenol 176:729-733
13. Sohlich RE, Sickles EA, Burnside ES, Dee KE (2002) Interpreting data from audits when screening and diagnostic mammography outcomes are combined. Am J Roentgenol 178:681-681
14. Baines CJ, Miller AB, Wall C et al (1986) Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a preliminary report from five centers. Radiology 160:295-298
15. Duijm LEM, Guit GL, Koomen AR, Willebrand D (1997) Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of breast imaging in the detection of cancer. Br J Cancer 76:377-381
16. Zonderland HM, Coerkamp EG, Hermans J et al (1999) Diagnosis of breast cancer: contribution of US as an adjunct to mammography. Radiology 213:412-422
17. Kopans DB (1992) The positive predictive value of mammography. Am J Roentgenol 158:521-526
18. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC (1999) BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 211:845-850
19. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB et al (1998) The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. Am J Roentgenol 171:35-40
20. Lacquement MA, Mitchell D, Hollingworth AB (1999) Positive predictive value of the breast imaging reporting and data system. J Am Coll Surg 189:34-40
21. Caplan LS, Blackman D, Nadel M, Monticciolo DL (1999) Coding mammograms using the classification "probably benign" finding short interval follow-up suggested. Am J Roentgenol 172:339-342
22. Rosen EL, Baker JA, Soo MS (2002) Malignant lesions initially subjected to short-term mammographic follow-up. Radiology 223:221-228
23. McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Rebner M, Johnson CC (1996) Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Am J Prev Med 12:282-288
24. Taplin SH, Ichodawa LE, Kerlikowski K et al (2002) Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. Radiology 222:529-535