Literature DB >> 10943276

The Mammography Quality Standards Act. An overview of the regulations and guidance.

B S Monsees1.   

Abstract

The MQSA has imposed a set of federal regulations on every facility and radiologist that performs or interprets mammograms. Because annual inspections and paperwork are somewhat burdensome, many hope that in the future the process of FDA inspections might be streamlined for facilities with good track records and few, if any, findings at inspection. This would serve to reduce facility inconvenience and the costs of regulatory compliance without compromising patient care and outcomes. Currently, however, although not all personnel are required to be familiar with the regulations, key individuals should be conversant with the rules, FDA guidance, and methods that the facility has devised to comply with the regulations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10943276     DOI: 10.1016/s0033-8389(05)70199-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0033-8389            Impact factor:   2.303


  11 in total

1.  Radiologists' attitudes and use of mammography audit reports.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Berta Geller; Natalia Vukshich Oster; Patricia A Carney; Diana L Miglioretti; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Edward A Sickles; Tracy Onega; Robert D Rosenberg; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  A data-driven approach for quality assessment of radiologic interpretations.

Authors:  William Hsu; Simon X Han; Corey W Arnold; Alex At Bui; Dieter R Enzmann
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Number of mammography cases read per year is a strong predictor of sensitivity.

Authors:  Wasfi I Suleiman; Sarah J Lewis; Dianne Georgian-Smith; Michael G Evanoff; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-05-07

4.  National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Authors:  Brian L Sprague; Robert F Arao; Diana L Miglioretti; Louise M Henderson; Diana S M Buist; Tracy Onega; Garth H Rauscher; Janie M Lee; Anna N A Tosteson; Karla Kerlikowske; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Feasibility and satisfaction with a tailored web-based audit intervention for recalibrating radiologists' thresholds for conducting additional work-up.

Authors:  Patricia A Carney; Berta M Geller; Edward A Sickles; Diana L Miglioretti; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Linn Abraham; Stephen A Feig; David Brown; Andrea J Cook; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  An assessment of the quality of mammography care at facilities treating medically vulnerable populations.

Authors:  L Elizabeth Goldman; Sebastien J-P A Haneuse; Diana L Miglioretti; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Bonnie Yankaskas; Rebecca Smith-Bindman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Effect of Time to Diagnostic Testing for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Abnormalities on Screening Efficacy: A Modeling Study.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; Jane J Kim; Reinier G S Meester; Brian L Sprague; Emily A Burger; Ann G Zauber; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Nicole G Campos; Chyke A Doubeni; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Stephen Sy; Oguzhan Alagoz; Natasha Stout; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Douglas A Corley; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs.

Authors:  Garth H Rauscher; Anne Marie Murphy; Jennifer M Orsi; Danielle M Dupuy; Paula M Grabler; Christine B Weldon
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Characterization of the imaging settings in screening mammography using a tracking and reporting system: A multi-center and multi-vendor analysis.

Authors:  Bruno Barufaldi; Samantha P Zuckerman; Regina B Medeiros; Andrew D Maidment; Homero Schiabel
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 2.685

10.  Decision theory applied to image quality control in radiology.

Authors:  Patrícia S Lessa; Cristofer A Caous; Paula R Arantes; Edson Amaro; Fernando M Campello de Souza
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.