Literature DB >> 9631167

Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis.

A I Mushlin1, R W Kouides, D E Shapiro.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the accuracy of mammographic screening.
DESIGN: A meta-analysis of published literature. DATA SOURCES: Published English-language randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and demonstration projects involving screening mammography were identified using recent review articles. We found additional references using MEDLINE searches combining the MeSH terms "mammography," "screening," and/or study authors and locations. STUDY SELECTION: We included all studies that provided information to calculate the true-positive rate (TPR) and the false-positive rate (FPR) for breast cancer screening. DATA EXTRACTION: Reported data were reviewed independently by the authors; calculations were compared and discrepancies resolved. We calculated the sensitivity as the number of breast cancers detected during the first round of screening (true positives) divided by the sum of the true positives and the false negatives (defined as cancer discovered within 1 year of screening). False-positives were determined by biopsy. DATA SYNTHESIS: TPR and FPR values from each study were plotted in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space. Tests of homogeneity were performed to assess the validity of using summary ROC curves or a single point to summarize the data. The reported TPR and FPR of mammography ranged from 83% to 95% and 0.9% to 6.5%, respectively. The sensitivity of mammography is higher in women over the age of 50 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of mammography should be recognized and included in discussions about policies for screening for breast cancer. This meta-analysis, by quantifying the expected TPR/FPR, should assist program planners, physicians, and women to understand better the cost and clinical implications of such screening programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9631167     DOI: 10.1016/s0749-3797(97)00019-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  30 in total

1.  Boundary modelling and shape analysis methods for classification of mammographic masses.

Authors:  R M Rangayyan; N R Mudigonda; J E Desautels
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Perceived sensitivity of mammographic screening: women's views on test accuracy and financial compensation for missed cancers.

Authors:  A Barratt; J Cockburn; C Furnival; A McBride; L Mallon
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 3.  CAD for mammography: the technique, results, current role and further developments.

Authors:  Ansgar Malich; Dorothee R Fischer; Joachim Böttcher
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-01-17       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Computed tomographic screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  Michael Lock; George Rodrigues
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Screening Mammography Among Older Women: A Review of United States Guidelines and Potential Harms.

Authors:  Deborah S Mack; Kate L Lapane
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Detection of microcalcifications by characteristic magnetic susceptibility effects using MR phase image cross-correlation analysis.

Authors:  Richard A Baheza; E Brian Welch; Daniel F Gochberg; Melinda Sanders; Sara Harvey; John C Gore; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

Authors:  Firas M Dabbous; Therese A Dolecek; Michael L Berbaum; Sarah M Friedewald; Wm Thomas Summerfelt; Kent Hoskins; Garth H Rauscher
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Quantitative contrast-enhanced spectral mammography based on photon-counting detectors: A feasibility study.

Authors:  Huanjun Ding; Sabee Molloi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Application of small-angle X-ray scattering for differentiation among breast tumors.

Authors:  V Changizi; A Arab Kheradmand; M A Oghabian
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2008-01

10.  Modern breast cancer detection: a technological review.

Authors:  Adam B Nover; Shami Jagtap; Waqas Anjum; Hakki Yegingil; Wan Y Shih; Wei-Heng Shih; Ari D Brooks
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2009-12-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.