MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/jnci/djt461

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2014

Radiologist interpretive volume and breast cancer screening accuracy in a Canadian organized screening program.

Théberge Isabelle, Chang Sue-Ling, Vandal Nathalie, Daigle Jean-Marc, Guertin Marie-Hélène, Pelletier Eric, Brisson Jacques

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

To strengthen evidence on which radiologist mammography interpretive volume requirements can be based, we assessed the relation of volume to accuracy in the Quebec Breast Cancer Screening Program.

METHODS

Annual interpretive volume (total, screening, and diagnostic) for all 340 radiologists who interpreted 1315327 screening examinations in the period from 2000 to 2006 was obtained using provincial databases. The association of volume to sensitivity, false-positive rate, and accuracy (sensitivity/false-positive rate) was assessed by multivariable Poisson regression with robust error variance. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Radiologists consistently interpreting less than 500 mammograms annually experienced a 58% reduction in accuracy (adjusted accuracy ratio = 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.74) compared with those who consistently interpreted at least 500 mammograms annually. Moreover, accuracy increased progressively as total annual volume increased (P trend = .0005). Radiologists interpreting at least 4000 mammograms annually experienced a 32% increase in accuracy (adjusted accuracy ratio = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.13 to 1.54) compared with those interpreting 500 to 999 mammograms annually. This increase in accuracy is attributable to a reduction in false-positive rate as total volume increased (P trend = .001). Sensitivity changed little with total volume (P trend = .68). Gains in accuracy were greater up to approximately 3000 mammograms interpreted annually.

CONCLUSIONS

The minimum annual volume of 500 mammograms required in North America is justified; radiologist accuracy may be compromised if interpretive volume is consistently less than this requirement. Raising interpretive volume may help to reduce the frequency of false positives without loss of sensitivity. Possible gains in accuracy may be greater with increases in volume of up to approximately 3000 mammograms interpreted annually.

Для цитирования: Théberge Isabelle, Chang Sue-Ling, Vandal Nathalie, Daigle Jean-Marc, Guertin Marie-Hélène, Pelletier Eric, Brisson Jacques. Radiologist interpretive volume and breast cancer screening accuracy in a Canadian organized screening program.. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djt461.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.