When radiologists perform best: The learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 632-640

  Miglioretti, Diana L ^a,b   Gard, Charlotte C ^a,b   Carney, Patricia A ^c   Onega, Tracy L ^d   Buist, Diana S M ^a   Sickles, Edward A ^e   Kerlikowske, Karla ^e,f   Rosenberg, Robert D ^g   Yankaskas, Bonnie C ^h   Geller, Berta M ⁱ   Elmore, Joann G ^j  

^a CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d NORRIS COTTON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTINUING EDUCATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RESIDENCY EDUCATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRAINING; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; EDUCATION; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY; REGISTER; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; FELLOWSHIPS AND SCHOLARSHIPS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MAMMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOLOGY; REGISTRIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 73949139887     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2533090070     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Ramsay CR, Grant AM, Wallace SA, Garthwaite PH, Monk AF, Russell IT. Assessment of the learning curve in health technologies: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000;16:1095-1108.
2. Gaster B. A piece of my mind: the learning curve. JAMA 1993;270:1280.
3. Subramonian K, Muir G. The "learning curve" in surgery: what is it, how do we measure it and can we influence it? BJU Int 2004;93:1173-1174.
4. Taylor PM. A review of research into the development of radiologic expertise: implications for computer-based training. Acad Radiol 2007;14:1252-1263.
5. Institute of Medicine. Breast imaging quality standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2005.
6. Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Abraham LA, et al. Performance benchmarks for screening mammography. Radiology 2006;241:55-66.
7. Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA, et al. Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:1840-1850.
8. Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Reisch LM, et al. Screening mammograms by community radiologists: variability in false-positive rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1373-1380.
9. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL, et al. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:358-367.
10. Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L, et al. Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1854-1863.
11. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology 2005;235:775-790.
12. Tan A, Freeman DH Jr, Goodwin JS, Freeman JL. Variation in false-positive rates of mammography reading among 1067 radiologists: a population-based assessment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;100:309-318.
13. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology 2002;224:861-869.
14. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1001-1008.
15. Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, et al. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1546-1554.
16. Elmore JG, Jackson SL, Abraham L, et al. Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy. Radiology 2009;253:###-###.
17. Carney PA, Geller BM, Moffett H, et al. Current medicolegal and confidentiality issues in large, multicenter research programs. Am J Epidemiol 2000;152:371-378.
18. American College of Radiology. American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003.
19. BCSC Glossary of Terms. http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/data/bcsc-data- definitions.pdf. Accessed April 22, 2009.
20. Neuhaus JM, Kalbfleisch JD, Hauck WW. A comparison of cluster-specific and population-averaged approaches for analyzing correlated binary data. Int Stat Rev 1991;59:25-35.
21. Zeger SL, Liang KY, Albert PS. Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. Biometrics 1988;44:1049-1060.
22. Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 1986;73:13-22.
23. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical methods in cancer research. Vol 1, The analysis of casecontrol studies. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1980.
24. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Quality determinants of mammography. Rockville, Md: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1994.
25. Molins E, Macia F, Ferrer F, Maristany MT, Castells X. Association between radiologists' experience and accuracy in interpreting screening mammograms. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:91.
26. Linver MN, Paster SB, Rosenberg RD, Key CR, Stidley CA, King WV. Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. Radiology 1992;184:39-43.
27. Fletcher SW. Chairman's summary of the conference. In Hager M, ed. Continuing education in the health professions: improving healthcare through lifelong learning, Nov 28 to Dec 1, 2007. Bermuda, New York: Josiah Macy, Jr Foundation, 2008.
28. Lewis RS, Sunshine JH, Bhargavan M. A portrait of breast imaging specialists and of the interpretation of mammography in the United States. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:W456-W68.
29. Gur D, Bandos AI, Cohen CS, et al. The "laboratory" effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations. Radiology 2008;249:47-53.
30. Gur D, Bandos AI, Klym AH, et al. Agreement of the order of overall performance levels under different reading paradigms. Acad Radiol 2008;15:1567-1573.
31. Rutter CM, Taplin S. Assessing mammographers' accuracy: a comparison of clinical and test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:443- 450.