This study aims to monitor diagnostic accuracy amongst Jordanian mammography readers and identify parameters linked to higher levels of performance. In this study, we have used the Breast Screen Reader Assessment Stra...This study aims to monitor diagnostic accuracy amongst Jordanian mammography readers and identify parameters linked to higher levels of performance. In this study, we have used the Breast Screen Reader Assessment Strategy (BREAST) platform to facilitate 27 radiologists in reading a case set of 60 digital mammograms, 20 of which included cancers. Each case consisted of the four standard cranio-caudal (CC) and medio-lateral oblique (MLO) projections. All radiologists were registered to read mammograms at their workplace by the Jordanian Ministry of Health. Each reader was asked to locate any malignancies, provide a confidence rating using a scale of 1 - 5, and identify the type of appearance. All images were displayed using 8 MP monitor, supported by radiology workstations with full image manipulation facilities. Results were evaluated using Jackknife Alternative Free-Response Receiver Operating Characteristic (JAFROC). Demographics obtained from each radiologist regarding their experience, qualifications and breast-reading activities were correlated against JAFROC scores using Spearman techniques. The results showed that the mean JAFROC score was 0. 52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46, 0.58);location sensitivity score was 0. 41 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.56);specificity score was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.83). Higher performance in term of JAFROC scores was directly related to number of years since professional qualification (r = 0.433;p = 0.024), number of years reading breast images (r = 0.62;r = 0.001) and number of mammography images read per year (r = 0.69;p = 0.001). On the other hand, higher performance was inversely linked to the frequency of reading other modalities per week (r = -0.48;p = 0.010). No other statistical differences were significant. Finally, higher radiologists’ performance in cancer detection is correlated with increasing the number of mammograms reads per week.展开更多
Radiological diagnostic errors may have serious clinical and medico-legal implications. Previous work has reported that radiology has a reasonable incidence of error, a number of which are resulted from observer mista...Radiological diagnostic errors may have serious clinical and medico-legal implications. Previous work has reported that radiology has a reasonable incidence of error, a number of which are resulted from observer mistakes. The radiologists’ interaction with the image is critical, and studying the types of diagnostic errors to improve patient and radiologist wellbeing, reduce cost and improve the public perception of the health care system is well justified. Therefore, the aim of current review is to consider the primary types of diagnostic errors in radiology, as well as their causes and implications with a focus on mammographic misdiagnosis.展开更多
文摘This study aims to monitor diagnostic accuracy amongst Jordanian mammography readers and identify parameters linked to higher levels of performance. In this study, we have used the Breast Screen Reader Assessment Strategy (BREAST) platform to facilitate 27 radiologists in reading a case set of 60 digital mammograms, 20 of which included cancers. Each case consisted of the four standard cranio-caudal (CC) and medio-lateral oblique (MLO) projections. All radiologists were registered to read mammograms at their workplace by the Jordanian Ministry of Health. Each reader was asked to locate any malignancies, provide a confidence rating using a scale of 1 - 5, and identify the type of appearance. All images were displayed using 8 MP monitor, supported by radiology workstations with full image manipulation facilities. Results were evaluated using Jackknife Alternative Free-Response Receiver Operating Characteristic (JAFROC). Demographics obtained from each radiologist regarding their experience, qualifications and breast-reading activities were correlated against JAFROC scores using Spearman techniques. The results showed that the mean JAFROC score was 0. 52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46, 0.58);location sensitivity score was 0. 41 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.56);specificity score was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.83). Higher performance in term of JAFROC scores was directly related to number of years since professional qualification (r = 0.433;p = 0.024), number of years reading breast images (r = 0.62;r = 0.001) and number of mammography images read per year (r = 0.69;p = 0.001). On the other hand, higher performance was inversely linked to the frequency of reading other modalities per week (r = -0.48;p = 0.010). No other statistical differences were significant. Finally, higher radiologists’ performance in cancer detection is correlated with increasing the number of mammograms reads per week.
文摘Radiological diagnostic errors may have serious clinical and medico-legal implications. Previous work has reported that radiology has a reasonable incidence of error, a number of which are resulted from observer mistakes. The radiologists’ interaction with the image is critical, and studying the types of diagnostic errors to improve patient and radiologist wellbeing, reduce cost and improve the public perception of the health care system is well justified. Therefore, the aim of current review is to consider the primary types of diagnostic errors in radiology, as well as their causes and implications with a focus on mammographic misdiagnosis.
