Accuracy of diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women

Medical Care

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 67-75

  Goldman, L Elizabeth ^a   Walker, Rod ^b   Miglioretti, Diana L ^b,c   Smith Bindman, Rebecca ^a   Kerlikowske, Karla ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b GROUP HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer; diagnostic mammography; disparities; quality of care

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE; RISK; RURAL POPULATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VULNERABLE POPULATION;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; VULNERABLE POPULATIONS;

EID: 78650687675     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181f380e0     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology. 2005;235:775-790.
2. Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L, et al. Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mam-mography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:1854-1863.
3. Jackson SL, Taplin SH, Sickles EA, et al. Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:814-827.
4. Jensen A, Vejborg I, Severinsen N, et al. Performance of clinical mammography: a nationwide study from Denmark. Int J Cancer. 2006; 119:183-191.
5. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y, et al. Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1151-1159.
6. Chlebowski RT, Chen Z, Anderson GL, et al. Ethnicity and breast cancer: factors influencing differences in incidence and outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:439-448.
7. Dalton SO, During M, Ross L, et al. The relation between socioeco-nomic and demographic factors and tumour stage in women diagnosed with breast cancer in Denmark, 1983-1999. Br J Cancer. 2006;95:653-659.
8. Ayanian JZ, Kohler BA, Abe T, et al. The relation between health insurance coverage and clinical outcomes among women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:326-331.
9. Goldman LE, Haneuse SJ, Miglioretti DL, et al. An assessment of the quality of mammography care at facilities treating medically vulnerable populations. Med Care. 2008;46:701-708.
10. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Correlation of radiologist rank as a measure of skill in screening and diagnostic interpretation of mammo-grams. Radiology. 2006;238:446-453.
11. Miglioretti DL, Rutter CM, Geller BM, et al. Effect of breast augmentation on the accuracy of mammography and cancer characteristics. JAMA. 2004;291:442-450.
12. El-Bastawissi AY, White E, Mandelson MT, et al. Variation in mam-mographic breast density by race. Ann Epidemiol. 2001;11:257-263.
13. American College of Radiology (ACR). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology 1998.
14. Radiology ACo. ACR practice guideline for the performance of screening and diagnostic mammogram. Resolution. 24;2008:1-10.
15. Kerlikowske K, Creasman J, Leung JW, et al. Differences in screening mammography outcomes among White, Chinese, and Filipino women. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:1862-1868.
16. Diggle P, Heagerty, P, Liang K, et al. Analysis of Longitudinal Data. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002.
17. Lane PW, Nelder JA. Analysis of covariance and standardization as instances of prediction. Biometrics. 1982;38:613-621.
18. Graubard BI, Korn EL. Predictive margins with survey data. Biometrics. 1999;55:652-659.
19. Miglioretti DL, Heagerty PJ. Marginal modeling of multilevel binary data with time-varying covariates. Biostatistics. 2004;5:381-398.
20. Allen JD, Shelton RC, Harden E, et al. Follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms among low-income ethnically diverse women: findings from a qualitative study. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;72:283-292.
21. Wujcik D, Fair AM. Barriers to diagnostic resolution after abnormal mammography: a review of the literature. Cancer Nurs. 2008;31:E16-E30.
22. Strzelczyk JJ, Dignan MB. Disparities in adherence to recommended follow-up on screening mammography: interaction of sociodemographic factors. Ethn Dis. 2002;12:77-86.
23. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL, et al. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:358-367.
24. Schaefer FK, Waldmann A, Katalinic A, et al. Influence of additional breast ultrasound on cancer detection in a cohort study for quality assurance in breast diagnosis-analysis of 102,577 diagnostic procedures. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1085-1092.
25. Devolli-Disha E, Manxhuka-Kerliu S, Ymeri H, et al. Comparative accuracy of mammography and ultrasound in women with breast symptoms according to age and breast density. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2009;9:131-136.