Literature DB >> 31135295

Influence of Mammography Volume on Radiologists' Performance: Results from BreastScreen Norway.

Solveig Roth Hoff1, Tor-Åge Myklebust1, Christoph I Lee1, Solveig Hofvind1.   

Abstract

Background Several European screening mammography programs that use independent double reading with consensus recommend an annual minimum reading volume of 5000 mammograms per radiologist. This recommendation is based only on expert opinion, and the influence of reading volume on performance in such programs is unknown. Purpose To examine the influence of annual and cumulative reading volume on radiologists' reading performance for digital mammography in a screening program that uses independent double reading with consensus. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included data from digital mammographic examinations in BreastScreen Norway obtained from 2006 to 2016. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to determine how sensitivity, rate of screening-detected breast cancer (SDC), and false-positive rate (FPR) before and after consensus meeting related to annual and cumulative reading volume. Results The study included 2 373 433 readings performed by 121 radiologists. The median annual reading volume ranged from 153 to 19 500 mammograms, and the median cumulative reading volume was 30 566 mammograms. Sensitivity and SDC rate were relatively stable at 87% to 90% and 4.9 to 4.7 per 1000 readings (0.49% and 0.47%), respectively, between 100 and 10 000 annual readings and at 88% to 89% and 4.8 to 4.9 per 1000 readings (0.48% and 0.49%) between 500 and 100 000 cumulative readings. There was a decreasing trend with higher annual volumes (P for trend < .001 for both) to a sensitivity of 81% and SDC rate of 3.9 per 1000 readings (0.39%) at 18 000 readings. There was a decreasing trend in FPR before and after consensus with higher annual and cumulative volumes (P for trend < .001 for all). FPRs before consensus meeting were 5.3% at 100 annual readings and 4.0% at 4000 annual readings and were 6.7% at 500 cumulative readings and 3.6% at 20 000 cumulative readings. FPRs after consensus meeting were 2.5% at 100 annual readings and 2.3% at 4000 annual readings and were 2.7% at 500 cumulative readings and 2.2% at 20 000 cumulative readings. Conclusion Annual reading volumes between 4000 and 10 000 mammograms and cumulative reading volumes greater than 20 000 mammograms may be the most optimal volumes for achieving high reading performance in a screening program with independent double reading. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Rosenberg and Seidenwurm in this issue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31135295     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019182684

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  3 in total

1.  Artificial Intelligence Evaluation of 122 969 Mammography Examinations from a Population-based Screening Program.

Authors:  Marthe Larsen; Camilla F Aglen; Christoph I Lee; Solveig R Hoff; Håkon Lund-Hanssen; Kristina Lång; Jan F Nygård; Giske Ursin; Solveig Hofvind
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 29.146

2.  A machine learning model based on readers' characteristics to predict their performances in reading screening mammograms.

Authors:  Ziba Gandomkar; Sarah J Lewis; Tong Li; Ernest U Ekpo; Patrick C Brennan
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2022-02-05       Impact factor: 3.307

3.  Breast cancer detection across dense and non-dense breasts: Markers of diagnostic confidence and efficacy.

Authors:  Ibrahim Hadadi; William Rae; Jillian Clarke; Mark McEntee; Ernest Ekpo
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2022-01-29
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.