Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goin, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lambird, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Goin, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lambird, P. A.

Radiology, Vol 148, 393-396, Copyright © 1983 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Analysis of mammography: a blind interpretation of BCDDP radiographs

JE Goin, JD Haberman, MK Linder and PA Lambird

An ROC curve analysis of mammography is presented. This study is based on a blind interpretation of radiographs of patients who underwent screening during the Oklahoma Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP). In particular, we evaluated the accuracy of mammography based on 38 incidence cancer cases. Incidence cases are those that develop in a patient after an initial visit and at least one additional annual visit before a biopsy is performed. Using 40 normal subjects, a sensitivity of 72% was attained at a 28% false positive rate. We also evaluated the contribution of viewing radiographs of both breasts (right and left) simultaneously as compared with viewing radiographs of the individual breasts singly. In cases on the threshold of detectability, the breast that did not result in the cancer diagnosis was occasionally identified as the most suspicious for cancer. When mammograms of the two breasts were compared, the false positive rate was lower. These results can be used to assess various screening strategies and to yield a more realistic accuracy estimate of mammography on a rescreened population than is currently available.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
L. Monnier-Cholley, F. Carrat, B. P. Cholley, J.-M. Tubiana, and L. Arrive
Detection of Lung Cancer on Radiographs: Receiver Operating Characteristic Analyses of Radiologists', Pulmonologists', and Anesthesiologists' Performance
Radiology, December 1, 2004; 233(3): 799 - 805.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
R. G. Swensson
Using Localization Data from Image Interpretations to Improve Estimates of Performance Accuracy
Med Decis Making, April 1, 2000; 20(2): 170 - 184.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ScienceHome page
J. Swets
Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems
Science, June 3, 1988; 240(4857): 1285 - 1293.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1983 by the Radiological Society of North America.