Literature DB >> 24976519

Identification of abnormal screening mammogram interpretation using Medicare claims data.

Rebecca A Hubbard1, Weiwei Zhu, Steven Balch, Tracy Onega, Joshua J Fenton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate Medicare claims-based approaches for identifying abnormal screening mammography interpretation. DATA SOURCES: Mammography data and linked Medicare claims for 387,709 mammograms performed from 1999 to 2005 within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). STUDY
DESIGN: Split-sample validation of algorithms based on claims for breast imaging or biopsy following screening mammography. DATA EXTRACTION
METHODS: Medicare claims and BCSC mammography data were pooled at a central Statistical Coordinating Center. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: Presence of claims for subsequent imaging or biopsy had sensitivity of 74.9 percent (95 percent confidence interval [CI], 74.1-75.6) and specificity of 99.4 percent (95 percent CI, 99.4-99.5). A classification and regression tree improved sensitivity to 82.5 percent (95 percent CI, 81.9-83.2) but decreased specificity (96.6 percent, 95 percent CI, 96.6-96.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Medicare claims may be a feasible data source for research or quality improvement efforts addressing high rates of abnormal screening mammography. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Medicare; mammography; quality assessment; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24976519      PMCID: PMC4319883          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.12194

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  13 in total

1.  Variation in false-positive rates of mammography reading among 1067 radiologists: a population-based assessment.

Authors:  Alai Tan; Daniel H Freeman; James S Goodwin; Jean L Freeman
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Resource use and cost of diagnostic workup of women with suspected breast cancer.

Authors:  David W Lee; Paul E Stang; George A Goldberg; Merle Haberman
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2008-12-12       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Racial inequities in the timing of breast cancer detection, diagnosis, and initiation of treatment.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Hannah M Linden; Lisa M Reisch; John Z Ayanian; Eric B Larson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Administrative data algorithms to identify second breast cancer events following early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Jessica Chubak; Onchee Yu; Gaia Pocobelli; Lois Lamerato; Joe Webster; Marianne N Prout; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; William E Barlow; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-04-30       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  The validity of race and ethnicity in enrollment data for Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Alan M Zaslavsky; John Z Ayanian; Lawrence B Zaborski
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists.

Authors:  Edward A Sickles; Dulcy E Wolverton; Katherine E Dee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Philip W Chu; Diana L Miglioretti; Edward A Sickles; Roger Blanks; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Janet K Bobo; Nancy C Lee; Matthew G Wallis; Julietta Patnick; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-10-22       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Distinguishing screening from diagnostic mammograms using Medicare claims data.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Weiwei Zhu; Steven Balch; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Paul Fishman; Rebecca A Hubbard
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Validation of a Medicare Claims-based Algorithm for Identifying Breast Cancers Detected at Screening Mammography.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Tracy Onega; Weiwei Zhu; Steven Balch; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Louise Henderson; Brian L Sprague; Karla Kerlikowske; Rebecca A Hubbard
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Diagnostic testing following screening mammography in the elderly.

Authors:  H G Welch; E S Fisher
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  4 in total

1.  Evaluating Lung Cancer Screening Uptake, Outcomes, and Costs in the United States: Challenges With Existing Data and Recommendations for Improvement.

Authors:  Ashish Rai; V Paul Doria-Rose; Gerard A Silvestri; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Screening Mammography Outcomes: Risk of Breast Cancer and Mortality by Comorbidity Score and Age.

Authors:  Joshua Demb; Linn Abraham; Diana L Miglioretti; Brian L Sprague; Ellen S O'Meara; Shailesh Advani; Louise M Henderson; Tracy Onega; Diana S M Buist; John T Schousboe; Louise C Walter; Karla Kerlikowske; Dejana Braithwaite
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Breast biopsy patterns and findings among older women undergoing screening mammography: The role of age and comorbidity.

Authors:  Shailesh Advani; Linn Abraham; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti; Brian L Sprague; Louise M Henderson; Tracy Onega; John T Schousboe; Joshua Demb; Dongyu Zhang; Louise C Walter; Christoph I Lee; Dejana Braithwaite; Ellen S O'Meara
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 3.929

4.  Intersections of machine learning and epidemiological methods for health services research.

Authors:  Sherri Rose
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 7.196

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.