Identification of factors associated with diagnostic performance variation in reporting of mammograms : A review
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVES: This narrative review aims to identify what factors are linked to diagnostic performance variation for those who interpret mammograms. Identification of influential factors has potential to contribute to the optimisation of breast cancer diagnosis. PubMed, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar databases were searched using the following terms: 'Radiology', 'Radiologist', 'Radiographer', 'Radiography', 'Mammography', 'Interpret', 'read', 'observe' 'report', 'screen', 'image', 'performance' and 'characteristics.' Exclusion criteria included articles published prior to 2000 as digital mammography was introduced at this time. Non-English articles language were also excluded. 38 of 2542 studies identified were analysed.
KEY FINDINGS: Influencing factors included, new technology, volume of reads, experience and training, availability of prior images, social networking, fatigue and time-of-day of interpretation. Advancements in breast imaging such as digital breast tomosynthesis and volume of mammograms are primary factors that affect performance as well as tiredness, time-of-day when images are interpreted, stages of training and years of experience. Recent studies emphasised the importance of social networking and knowledge sharing if breast cancer diagnosis is to be optimised.
CONCLUSION: It was demonstrated that data on radiologist performance variability is widely available but there is a paucity of data on radiographers who interpret mammographic images.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This scarcity of research needs to be addressed in order to optimise radiography-led reporting and set baseline values for diagnostic efficacy.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:29 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Radiography (London, England : 1995) - 29(2023), 2 vom: 05. März, Seite 340-346 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Clerkin, N [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Advanced practice |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 28.03.2023 Date Revised 29.03.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.radi.2023.01.004 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM352415770 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM352415770 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226053657.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.radi.2023.01.004 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1174.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM352415770 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36731351 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1078-8174(23)00004-4 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Clerkin, N |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Identification of factors associated with diagnostic performance variation in reporting of mammograms |b A review |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 28.03.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 29.03.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVES: This narrative review aims to identify what factors are linked to diagnostic performance variation for those who interpret mammograms. Identification of influential factors has potential to contribute to the optimisation of breast cancer diagnosis. PubMed, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar databases were searched using the following terms: 'Radiology', 'Radiologist', 'Radiographer', 'Radiography', 'Mammography', 'Interpret', 'read', 'observe' 'report', 'screen', 'image', 'performance' and 'characteristics.' Exclusion criteria included articles published prior to 2000 as digital mammography was introduced at this time. Non-English articles language were also excluded. 38 of 2542 studies identified were analysed | ||
| 520 | |a KEY FINDINGS: Influencing factors included, new technology, volume of reads, experience and training, availability of prior images, social networking, fatigue and time-of-day of interpretation. Advancements in breast imaging such as digital breast tomosynthesis and volume of mammograms are primary factors that affect performance as well as tiredness, time-of-day when images are interpreted, stages of training and years of experience. Recent studies emphasised the importance of social networking and knowledge sharing if breast cancer diagnosis is to be optimised | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: It was demonstrated that data on radiologist performance variability is widely available but there is a paucity of data on radiographers who interpret mammographic images | ||
| 520 | |a IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This scarcity of research needs to be addressed in order to optimise radiography-led reporting and set baseline values for diagnostic efficacy | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Advanced practice | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Breast Imaging | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Image interpretation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Radiography | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Radiography led Reporting | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ski, C F |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brennan, P C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Strudwick, R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Radiography (London, England : 1995) |d 1998 |g 29(2023), 2 vom: 05. März, Seite 340-346 |w (DE-627)NLM095446265 |x 1532-2831 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:29 |g year:2023 |g number:2 |g day:05 |g month:03 |g pages:340-346 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2023.01.004 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 29 |j 2023 |e 2 |b 05 |c 03 |h 340-346 | ||