Potentially missed detection with screening mammography: Does the quality of radiologist's interpretation vary by patient socioeconomic advantage/disadvantage?

Annals of Epidemiology

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 210-214

  Rauscher, Garth H ^a   Khan, Jenna A ^a   Berbaum, Michael L ^a   Conant, Emily F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Health care disparities; Mammography; Screening; Socioeconomic status

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST LESION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MINORITY GROUP; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; SOCIAL STATUS; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHICAGO; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HEALTHCARE DISPARITIES; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 84875381254     PISSN: 10472797     EISSN: 18732585     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.01.006     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Ansell D., Grabler P., Whitman S., Ferrans C., Burgess-Bishop J., Murray L.R., et al. A community effort to reduce the black/white breast cancer mortality disparity in Chicago. Cancer Causes Control 2009, 20:1681-1688.
2. Rauscher G.H., Allgood K.L., Whitman S., Conant E. Unequal distribution of screening mammography services by race/ethnicity and health insurance. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2011, 21(2):154-160. 10.1089/jwh.2010.2415.
3. Miglioretti D.L., Smith-Bindman R., Abraham L., Brenner R.J., Carney P.A., Bowles E.J., et al. Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007, 99:1854-1863. 10.1093/jnci/djm238.
4. Sickles E.A., Wolverton D.E., Dee K.E. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology 2002, 224:861-869.
5. Leung J.W.T., Margolin F.R., Dee K.E., Jacobs R.P., Denny S.R., Shrumpf J.D. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography in a community practice: are there differences between specialists and general radiologists?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188:236-241.
6. Rauscher G.H., Ferrans C.E., Kaiser K., Campbell R.T., Calhoun E.E., Warnecke R.B. Misconceptions about breast lumps and delayed medical presentation in urban breast cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010, 19:640-647. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0997.
7. The American Association for Public Opinion Research Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys 2011, AAPOR. 7th ed.
8. Ahern J., Hubbard A., Galea S. Estimating the effects of potential public health interventions on population disease burden: a step-by-step illustration of causal inference methods. Am J Epidemiol 2009, 169(9):1140-1147.
9. Azur M.J., Stuart E.A., Frangakis C., Leaf P.J. Multiple imputation by chained equations: what is it and how does it work?. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2011, 20(1):40-49.
10. Little R.J.A., Rubin D.B. Statistical analysis with missing data 1987, Wiley, New York.
11. Elmore J.G., Jackson S.L., Abraham L., Miglioretti D.L., Carney P.A., Geller B.M., et al. Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy. Radiology 2009, 253:641-651. 10.1148/radiol.2533082308.
12. Miglioretti D.L., Gard C.C., Carney P.A., Onega T.L., Buist D.S., Sickles E.A., et al. When radiologists perform best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation. Radiology 2009, 253:632-640. 10.1148/radiol.2533090070.
13. Smith-Bindman R., Chu P., Miglioretti D.L., Quale C., Rosenberg R.D., Cutter G., et al. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005, 97:358-367. 10.1093/jnci/dji060.
14. Esserman L., Cowley H., Eberle C., Kirkpatrick A., Chang S., Berbaum K., et al. Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:369-375.
15. Taplin S., Abraham L., Barlow W.E., Fenton J.J., Berns E.A., Carney P.A., et al. Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100:876-887. 10.1093/jnci/djn172.
16. Beam C.A., Conant E.F., Sickles E.A. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003, 95:282-290.