The Accuracy of Mammographic Interpretation
- 1 December 1994
- journal article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 331 (22) , 1521-1522
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199412013312213
Abstract
It should come as no surprise that there is a range of skills and expertise among physicians involved in similar activities. This is true in every endeavor, and it is true for radiologists who interpret mammograms. The findings reported in this issue of the Journal by Elmore et al.1 are therefore not unexpected. The apparent magnitude of the variation among radiologists, however, is in part a result of the trial design itself, which amplified the rates of disagreement. Of the 150 women with mammograms reviewed by the 10 radiologists studied by this group, 54 (36 percent) had benign lesions, which . . .Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Variability in Radiologists' Interpretations of MammogramsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program.Radiology, 1994
- The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a critical review.American Journal of Roentgenology, 1993
- Breast imaging and the standard of care for the symptomatic patient.Radiology, 1993
- To follow or not to follow, that is the question.Radiology, 1992
- The prevalence of carcinoma in palpable vs impalpable, mammographically detected lesions.American Journal of Roentgenology, 1991
- Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programs.Radiology, 1990
- Psychophysical Studies of Detection Errors in Chest RadiologyRadiology, 1977