Literature DB >> 7038244

Observer variation in the interpretation of xeromammograms.

N F Boyd, C Wolfson, M Moskowitz, T Carlile, M Petitclerc, H A Ferri, E Fishell, A Gregoire, M Kiernan, J D Longley, I S Simor, A B Miller.   

Abstract

We have examined variation in the interpretation of xeromammograms among radiologists designated to take part in a Canadian multicenter randomized controlled trial of screening for breast cancer. Radiologists read 100 xeromammograms comprising 10 histologically proved cancers, 40 benign abnormalities, and 50 normal films. Radiologists' opinions differed widely on the frequency of suspected or identified cancer. The diagnostic category "suspicion of cancer" or "cancer" was selected by radiologists for 10-55% of the films, and biopsy or aspiration was recommended for 21 to 53% of patients whose films were examined. Agreement on specific diagnostic categories was greatest for the diagnosis of cancer; agreement was least for the diagnosis of benign abnormalities and intermediate for the diagnosis of normality. Known cancers were in general correctly identified. These results indicate a need for development of methods to reduce observer variation in a interpretation of xeromammograms while preserving diagnostic sensitivity and validity. Results also emphasize the importance of developing strategies to ensure quality control in multicenter trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7038244

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  9 in total

1.  Screening for breast cancer: current status, problems, prospects.

Authors:  J E Devitt
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1985-01       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  The Leech method for diagnosing constipation: intra- and interobserver variability and accuracy.

Authors:  Fleur de Lorijn; Rick R van Rijn; Jarom Heijmans; Johannes B Reitsma; Wieger P Voskuijl; Onno D F Henneman; Jan A Taminiau; Marc A Benninga
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2005-11-10

3.  [CT-based assessment score after ventral spondylodesis for thoracolumbar spine fracture].

Authors:  A Badke; P Jedrusik; M Feiler; F Dammann; C D Claussen; H P Kaps; K Weise
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 4.  Screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Katrina Armstrong; Constance D Lehman; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Cancer imaging - the significance of the findings.

Authors:  R H Reznek
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2000-10-09       Impact factor: 3.909

6.  Intraobserver reproducibility in assigning brain tumors to classes in the World Health Organization diagnostic scheme. The Childhood Brain Tumor Consortium.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 4.130

7.  Impact of cone beam CT on diagnosis of external cervical resorption: the severity of resorption assessed in periapical radiographs and cone beam CT. A prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Julie Suhr Villefrance; Lise-Lotte Kirkevang; Ann Wenzel; Michael Væth; Louise Hauge Matzen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  The impact of grey zones on the accuracy of agreement measures for ordinal tables.

Authors:  Quoc Duyet Tran; Anil Dolgun; Haydar Demirhan
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 9.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.