Article

Is Confidence of Mammographic Assessment a Good Predictor of Accuracy?

Department of Family Medicine, University of Vermont, 1 S Prospect St, Burlington, VT 05401-3444, USA.
American Journal of Roentgenology (Impact Factor: 2.73). 07/2012; 199(1):W134-41. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7701
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Interpretive accuracy varies among radiologists, especially in mammography. This study examines the relationship between radiologists' confidence in their assessments and their accuracy in interpreting mammograms.
In this study, 119 community radiologists interpreted 109 expert-defined screening mammography examinations in test sets and rated their confidence in their assessment for each case. They also provided a global assessment of their ability to interpret mammograms. Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were modeled as functions of self-rated confidence on each examination using log-linear regression estimated with generalized estimating equations. Reference measures were cancer status and expert-defined need for recall. Effect modification by weekly mammography volume was examined.
Radiologists who self-reported higher global interpretive ability tended to interpret more mammograms per week (p = 0.08), were more likely to specialize (p = 0.02) and to have completed a fellowship in breast or women's imaging (p = 0.05), and had a higher PPV for cancer detection (p = 0.01). Examinations for which low-volume radiologists were "very confident" had a PPV of 2.93 times (95% CI, 2.01-4.27) higher than examinations they rated with neutral confidence. Trends of increasing NPVs with increasing confidence were significant for low-volume radiologists relative to noncancers (p = 0.01) and expert nonrecalls (p < 0.001). A trend of significantly increasing NPVs existed for high-volume radiologists relative to expert nonrecall (p = 0.02) but not relative to noncancer status (p = 0.32).
Confidence in mammography assessments was associated with better accuracy, especially for low-volume readers. Asking for a second opinion when confidence in an assessment is low may increase accuracy.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Joann G Elmore
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Breast cancer is emerging as a major health care challenge in developing countries. Most recent data show that breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women and the leading cause of mortality from cancer. Breast cancer incidence in developing countries accounts for 51 % of the worldwide incidence. Younger women, i.e., between the ages of 15 and 49, are diagnosed with breast cancer in developing countries in a higher proportion than in developed countries (23 % to 10 %). Cost-effective health care interventions are urgently needed to reduce the increasing mortality rate from breast cancer. This chapter provides an overview of methods that have been extensively studied and whose benefits have been validated to screen for breast cancer in developed countries. Screening mammography is discussed in detail, and its benefits and potential harms are presented with an outline of the challenges of implementation and extensive resources that an organized or an opportunistic program involves. Potential low cost alternatives that may be more relevant in low resource settings such as clinical breast examination (CBE) and breast self-examination are presented. Finally, an optimal strategy for screening for breast cancer is described. This involves improved awareness of breast health among women through education and self-awareness, and periodic screening CBE performed by a trained health care professional combined with a focused sonographic evaluation of screen positive women. A detailed discussion of the use of ultrasound in characterizing palpable abnormalities in the breast and its role in optimally triaging patients who need diagnostic tissue sampling, thereby minimizing false positives, is presented. Finally, the pros and cons of fine needle aspiration biopsy and large core needle biopsy in the assessment of palpable solid masses that need tissue diagnosis are discussed.
    No preview · Chapter · Apr 2013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: LEARNING OBJECTIVES 1) Review strategies to improve diagnostic accuracy in interpreting chest radiographs. 2) Enhance confidence for NOT obtaining follow-up CT. 3) Increase appreciation of when follow-up CT is needed. ABSTRACT In this session, we will review the role of the chest x-ray (CXR) in the era of high tech imaging. Specifically the need to re-establish a sense of confidence in interpreting CXR will be addressed. Situations where a confident interpretaion of the CXR obviates the need for CT will be stressed as well as those where the CXR clearly requires CT follow-up. The need to “image gently”, following ALARA, guidelines is now widely accepted in pediatric radiology and is growing in acceptance in adult imaging. In our department (Boston Children’s Hospital) this has lead to a 24% decrease in CT volume between 2006 and 2010. This in turn, means that a need for an increased nuanced approach to interpreting CXR is required. Specific recommendations to increase the accuracy in interpreting CXR will be discussed. As the indications for a high percentage of CXR in pediatrics are nonspecific, the need to constantly be vigilent regarding unexpected and uncommon conditions will be stressed. Particular attention will be paid to the broad range of conditions related to wheezing (or noisy breathing) and dyspnea including airway obstruction and interstitial lung disease. The increasing incidence of complications in pediatric community acquired pnuemonia and the appropriate role of CXR in that situation will also be discussed.
    No preview · Conference Paper · Dec 2013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening is defined as the presumptive identification of unrecognized disease by means of tests, examinations, or other procedures that can be applied rapidly. The World Health Organization outlines a number of important prerequisites to justify implementation of an effective screening program: Target cancer should have a high prevalence and be associated with a high mortality and morbidity; the screening test has to be safe, effective, and acceptable; the compliance of the target population in attending initial screening and diagnosis and in follow-up visits has to be high; effective treatment should be available to be delivered to screen positive cases; an ideal screening test is one which detects a high percentage of cancers [sensitivity] and has low false-positive rate so that disease-free women are not subjected to unnecessary diagnostic tests. A high prevalence of cancer in the target population being screened is an important prerequisite since even the best screening test will be ineffective when deployed in a population with a low prevalence of cancer. National and/or professional or regulatory body guidelines in individual countries for cancer screening should be based on cancer incidence and prevalence statistics. These need to address at what age and how frequent screening needs to be performed; additional influencing factors to be taken into consideration will also include cost-effectiveness of screening strategy. Quality control and assurance to ensure effectiveness, accuracy, and consistency has to be applied to and monitored for health-care personnel performing and interpreting these tests as well as for the equipment used for this purpose. A tested and a robust referral system for women testing positive for cancers needs to be in place. An information system that can send out invitations for initial screening, follow-up visits, and repeat screening at predetermined intervals is a must to ensure success.
    No preview · Chapter · Oct 2014
Show more