Diagnostic accuracy of mammography readers and their memory performance have no correlation with each other

Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 315-324

  Kok, P ^a   Pitman, A G ^b,c   Cawson, J N ^a   Gledhill, S ^d   Kremer, S ^e,f   Lawson, J ^g   Mehta, K ^h,i   Mercuri, V ^a,j   Shnier, D ^k   Taft, R ^i,l   Zentner, L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (Australia)

^c Lake Imaging   (Australia)

^d University of Melbourne ^*  (Australia)

^e MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^f I Med Victoria   (Australia)

^g Southern Healthcare Network   (Australia)

^h ST VINCENT S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

ⁱ St Vincent's BreastScreen   (Australia)

^j Lake Imaging   (Australia)

^k WESTERN HEALTH   (Australia)

^l Independent Imaging   (Australia)

more..

Author keywords

diagnostic errors; mammography; memory; neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST LYMPHOMA; BREAST TUMOR; CALCULATION; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EXPERIENCE; HUMAN; LYMPHOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; MELANOMA; MEMORY; PERFORMANCE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZATION;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEMORY; MENTAL RECALL; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 77955838657     PISSN: 17549477     EISSN: 17549485     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2010.02177.x     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. BreastScreen Australia Program: about the program Cited 24 March 2010] Available from URL: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/ breastscreen-about
2. Berlin L, Berlin JW. Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 165 : 781 8.
3. Hardesty LA, Ganott MA, Hakim CM, Cohen CS, Clearfield RJ, Gur D. 'Memory effect' in observer performance studies of mammograms. Acad Radiol 2005 12 : 286 90.
4. Krupinski E. Visual search of mammographic images: influence of lesion subtlety. Acad Radiol 2005 12 (8 965 9.
5. Nodine C, Kundel H, Mello-Thoms C et al. How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Acad Radiol 1999 6 (10 575 85.
6. Nodine C, Kundel H, Lauver S, Toto L. Nature of expertise in searching mammograms for breast masses. Acad Radiol 1996 3 (12 1000 6.
7. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. BreastScreen Australia National Accreditation Standards [PDF] Cited 24 March 2010] Available from URL: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/br- accreditation/$File/standards.pdf
8. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005 353 : 1773 83.
9. Skaane P, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F et al. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field mammography with soft-copy reading - observer performance study. Radiology 2005 237 : 37 44.