Literature DB >> 19945040

The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history.

Elizabeth S Burnside1, Edward A Sickles, Lawrence W Bassett, Daniel L Rubin, Carol H Lee, Debra M Ikeda, Ellen B Mendelson, Pamela A Wilcox, Priscilla F Butler, Carl J D'Orsi.   

Abstract

The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) initiative, instituted by the ACR, was begun in the late 1980s to address a lack of standardization and uniformity in mammography practice reporting. An important component of the BI-RADS initiative is the lexicon, a dictionary of descriptors of specific imaging features. The BI-RADS lexicon has always been data driven, using descriptors that previously had been shown in the literature to be predictive of benign and malignant disease. Once established, the BI-RADS lexicon provided new opportunities for quality assurance, communication, research, and improved patient care. The history of this lexicon illustrates a series of challenges and instructive successes that provide a valuable guide for other groups that aspire to develop similar lexicons in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19945040      PMCID: PMC3099247          DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2009.07.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  55 in total

1.  Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies.

Authors:  D M Ikeda; N M Hylton; K Kinkel; M G Hochman; C K Kuhl; W A Kaiser; J C Weinreb; S F Smazal; H Degani; P Viehweg; J Barclay; M D Schnall
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Reading and decision aids for improved accuracy and standardization of mammographic diagnosis.

Authors:  C J D'Orsi; D J Getty; J A Swets; R M Pickett; S E Seltzer; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  The technical quality of mammography in centers participating in a regional breast cancer awareness program.

Authors:  B M Galkin; S A Feig; H D Muir
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  Computerized follow-up of abnormalities detected at mammography screening.

Authors:  D L Monticciolo; E A Sickles
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Correlation between breast parenchymal patterns and mammographers' certainty of diagnosis.

Authors:  L L Fajardo; B J Hillman; C Frey
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 6.016

6.  Enhanced interpretation of diagnostic images.

Authors:  D J Getty; R M Pickett; C J D'Orsi; J A Swets
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 6.016

7.  Breast cancer prediction and the Wolfe classification of mammograms.

Authors:  T Carlile; K J Kopecky; D J Thompson; J R Whitehead; F I Gilbert; A J Present; B A Threatt; P Krook; E Hadaway
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1985 Aug 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases.

Authors:  E A Sickles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers.

Authors:  M T Mandelson; N Oestreicher; P L Porter; D White; C A Finder; S H Taplin; E White
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-07-05       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Wolfe mammographic parenchymal patterns. A study of the masking hypothesis of Egan and Mosteller.

Authors:  J Whitehead; T Carlile; K J Kopecky; D J Thompson; F I Gilbert; A J Present; B A Threatt; P Krook; E Hadaway
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1985-09-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  71 in total

1.  Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting.

Authors:  Lawrence H Schwartz; David M Panicek; Alexandra R Berk; Yuelin Li; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-04-25       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The practical application of the UK 5-point scoring system for breast imaging: how standardisation of reporting supports the multidisciplinary team.

Authors:  L S Wilkinson; N T F Ridley
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  The importance of standardized interpretation of molecular breast imaging with dedicated gamma cameras.

Authors:  Orazio Schillaci
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  External validation of a publicly available computer assisted diagnostic tool for mammographic mass lesions with two high prevalence research datasets.

Authors:  Matthias Benndorf; Elizabeth S Burnside; Christoph Herda; Mathias Langer; Elmar Kotter
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Lexicon for standardized interpretation of gamma camera molecular breast imaging: observer agreement and diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Amy Lynn Conners; Carrie B Hruska; Cindy L Tortorelli; Robert W Maxwell; Deborah J Rhodes; Judy C Boughey; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Characterizing upper urinary tract dilation on ultrasound: a survey of North American pediatric radiologists' practices.

Authors:  David W Swenson; Kassa Darge; Sonja I Ziniel; Jeanne S Chow
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-11-25

7.  Improving breast cancer risk prediction by using demographic risk factors, abnormality features on mammograms and genetic variants.

Authors:  Shara I Feld; Kaitlin M Woo; Roxana Alexandridis; Yirong Wu; Jie Liu; Peggy Peissig; Adedayo A Onitilo; Jennifer Cox; C David Page; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-12-05

8.  Using Natural Language Processing of Free-Text Radiology Reports to Identify Type 1 Modic Endplate Changes.

Authors:  Hannu T Huhdanpaa; W Katherine Tan; Sean D Rundell; Pradeep Suri; Falgun H Chokshi; Bryan A Comstock; Patrick J Heagerty; Kathryn T James; Andrew L Avins; Srdjan S Nedeljkovic; David R Nerenz; David F Kallmes; Patrick H Luetmer; Karen J Sherman; Nancy L Organ; Brent Griffith; Curtis P Langlotz; David Carrell; Saeed Hassanpour; Jeffrey G Jarvik
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Workflow Lexicons in Healthcare: Validation of the SWIM Lexicon.

Authors:  Chris Meenan; Bradley Erickson; Nancy Knight; Jewel Fossett; Elizabeth Olsen; Prerna Mohod; Joseph Chen; Steve G Langer
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 10.  Role of US LI-RADS in the LI-RADS Algorithm.

Authors:  Shuchi K Rodgers; David T Fetzer; Helena Gabriel; James H Seow; Hailey H Choi; Katherine E Maturen; Ashish P Wasnik; Tara A Morgan; Nirvikar Dahiya; Mary K O'Boyle; Yuko Kono; Claude B Sirlin; Aya Kamaya
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2019 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.