Literature DB >> 7762720

Peer review of mammography interpretations in a breast cancer screening program.

J Feldman1, R A Smith, R Giusti, B DeBuono, J P Fulton, H D Scott.   

Abstract

Mammograms from a statewide screening program were subjected to a blind review by a panel of expert mammographers. Ninety-five percent (173/182) of original normal mammograms and 53% (164/311) of original abnormal mammograms were reread as normal. In comparison with the expert panel community radiologists were more likely to request a repeat mammogram in 6 months than to interpret a mammogram as normal or address their uncertainty with an immediate diagnostic workup.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7762720      PMCID: PMC1615517          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.85.6.837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  3 in total

1.  Screening for breast cancer: the Swedish trial.

Authors:  L Tabàr; A Gad
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Low-cost screening mammography: report on finances and review of 21,716 consecutive cases.

Authors:  R E Bird
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27,114 examinations.

Authors:  E A Sickles; S H Ominsky; R A Sollitto; H B Galvin; D L Monticciolo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 11.105

  3 in total
  1 in total

1.  Using Medicare data to estimate the prevalence of breast cancer screening in older women: comparison of different methods to identify screening mammograms.

Authors:  Whitney M Randolph; Jonathan D Mahnken; James S Goodwin; Jean L Freeman
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.402

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.