A dedicated BI-RADS training programme: Effect on the inter-observer variation among screening radiologists

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 81, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 2184-2188

  Timmers, J M H ^a,b   Van Doorne Nagtegaal, H J ^c   Verbeek, A L M ^a,b   Den Heeten, G J ^a,d   Broeders, M J M ^a,b  

^a National Expert and Training Centre for Breast Cancer Screening   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Integraal Kankercentrum Amsterdam   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

BI RADS; Inter observer variability; Mammography; Screening; Training

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; FEMALE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTEROBSERVER VARIATION; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RADIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84864692704     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.07.011     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. National Evaluation Team for Breast cancer screening. National evaluation of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands, 1990-2007. XII. 1-12-2009. Rotterdam, NETB.
2. B.C. Yankaskas, C.N. Klabunde, and R. ncelle-Park International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done? J Med Screen 11 4 2004 187 193
3. National Expert and Training Centre for Breast Cancer Screening. National Expert and Training Centre for Breast Cancer Screening. Available from: www.lrcb.nl. (accessed 13.1.11).
4. American College of Radiology American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas (BI-RADS). 4th ed. 2003 American College of Radiology Preston (Va)
5. American College of Radiology ACR Practice Guideline for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography 2008 American College of Radiology Preston (Va)
6. H.M. Zonderland, M.K. Tuut, and G.J. den Heeten Revised practice guideline 'Screening and diagnosis of breast cancer' Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 152 43 2008 2336 2339
7. Nationaal Borstkanker Overleg Nederland (NABON). Guidelines for screening, diagnosis and treatment of mamma carcinoma (2008). 1-4-2008. Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement (CBO). 14-12-2010.
8. E. Lazarus, M.B. Mainiero, B. Schepps, S.L. Koelliker, and L.S. Livingston BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value Radiology 239 2 2006 385 391
9. J.G. Elmore, C.K. Wells, C.H. Lee, D.H. Howard, and A.R. Feinstein Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms N Engl J Med 331 22 1994 1493 1499
10. Z.S. Cosar, M. Cetin, T.K. Tepe, R. Cetin, and A.C. Zarali Concordance of mammographic classifications of microcalcifications in breast cancer diagnosis: utility of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (fourth edition) Clin Imag 29 6 2005 389 395
11. S. Ciatto, N. Houssami, and A. Apruzzese Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience) Breast 15 1 2006 44 51
12. W.A. Berg, C.J. D'Orsi, and V.P. Jackson Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? Radiology 224 3 2002 871 880
13. A.A. Bankier, D. Levine, E.F. Halpern, and H.Y. Kressel Consensus interpretation in imaging research: is there a better way? Radiology 257 1 2010 14 17
14. E.D. Pisano, C.A. Gatsonis, and M.J. Yaffe American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology Radiology 236 2 2005 404 412
15. E.A. Ooms, H.M. Zonderland, and M.J. Eijkemans Mammography: interobserver variability in breast density assessment Breast 16 6 2007 568 576
16. W.A. Berg, C. Campassi, P. Langenberg, and M.J. Sexton Breast imaging reporting and data system: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment AJR Am J Roentgenol 174 6 2000 1769 1777
17. A.L. Antonio, and C.M. Crespi Predictors of interobserver agreement in breast imaging using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Breast Cancer Res Treat 120 3 2010 539 546
18. R. Holland, H.J. Rijken, and J.H. Hendriks The Dutch population-based mammography screening: 30-years experience Breast Care 2 2007 12 18
19. Nationaal Borstkanker Overleg Nederland (NABON). Richtlijn Mammacarcinoom 2007 [Guideline Mamma Carcinoma 2007, screening and diagnosis], 2007, Groningen, Cobra Medical.
20. J. Cohen A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales Educ Psychol Measure 20 1960 37 46
21. SPSS Inc. SPSS 16.0 16 2009 SPSS Inc Chicago, Illinois
22. J.R. Landis, and G.G. Koch The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Biometrics 33 1 1977 159 174
23. K. Kerlikowske, D. Grady, and J. Barclay Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System J Natl Cancer Inst 90 23 1998 1801 1809
24. D.L. Miglioretti, C.C. Gard, and P.A. Carney When radiologists perform best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation Radiology 253 3 2009 632 640
25. P.M. Taylor A review of research into the development of radiologic expertise: implications for computer-based training Acad Radiol 14 10 2007 1252 1263
26. C.F. Nodine, H.L. Kundel, and C. Mello-Thoms How experience and training influence mammography expertise Acad Radiol 6 10 1999 575 585