Literature DB >> 2119103

Canadian National Breast Screening Study: assessment of technical quality by external review.

C J Baines1, A B Miller, D B Kopans, M Moskowitz, D E Sanders, E A Sickles, T To, C Wall.   

Abstract

Mammograms from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) were reviewed by three external experts to provide an objective evaluation of their technical quality, to establish a model for auditing mammograms in a screening program, and to assess whether NBSS mammograms improved over time. The sample reviewed included 10 randomly chosen mammograms from each of 15 screening centers for each calendar year of their operation between 1980 and 1987. All 830 mammograms were reviewed on two consecutive days in randomized sequence by each reader, and rated 0-3 for each of four criteria including positioning and image quality, with a total possible score of 0-12. Although the mammograms were not in temporal sequence when reviewed, the scores assigned by each reader were significantly higher for mammograms dating from later years. Subjects' ages at entry (40-49 vs 50-59 years) did not affect the score. The largest increase in scores was associated with a 1985 protocol change in which mediolateral oblique positioning replaced straight mediolateral positioning. This study reinforces the importance of monitoring technical quality in screening programs and establishes that the NBSS benefited from technical improvements during its operation. A retrospective review of NBSS mammography by three external reviewers confirmed that technical quality improved from 1980 to 1987. This improvement was associated with improved technology (film, processing, and units) and with the quality assurance programs operating during the NBSS, which identified problems and offered remedies.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2119103     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.155.4.2119103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  26 in total

1.  The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a clinician's perspective.

Authors:  A A Starreveld
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  CJS debate: Is mammography useful in average-risk screening for breast cancer?

Authors:  Muriel Brackstone; Steven Latosinsky; Elizabeth Saettler; Ralph George
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: opportunity for a rethink.

Authors:  A S Basinski
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors:  M G Marmot; D G Altman; D A Cameron; J A Dewar; S G Thompson; M Wilcox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Mammographic breast density and risk of breast cancer: masking bias or causality?

Authors:  C H van Gils; J D Otten; A L Verbeek; J H Hendriks
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 8.082

6.  Were our estimates of overdiagnosis with mammography screening in the United States "based on faulty science"?

Authors:  Archie Bleyer
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2014-02

7.  Response to: "[Miller's] Response to: 'Beyond the mammography debate: a moderate perspective'".

Authors:  Martin J Yaffe
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 8.  The wisdom trial is based on faulty reasoning and has major design and execution problems.

Authors:  Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Canadian National Breast Screening Study: response.

Authors:  A B Miller
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1993-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Mammography Screening - as of 2013.

Authors:  S Heywang-Koebrunner; K Bock; W Heindel; G Hecht; L Regitz-Jedermann; A Hacker; V Kaeaeb-Sanyal
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.