Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Performance benchmarks for screening mammography.

Robert D Rosenberg1, Bonnie C Yankaskas, Linn A Abraham

  • 1Department of Radiology, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, MSC10 5530, USA. rrosenb@unm.edu

Radiology
|September 23, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-Guided Biopsy versus Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy of Non-Calcified Breast Lesions.

Academic radiology·2026
Same author

Longitudinal Analysis of Changes in Deep Learning Image-based Breast Cancer Risk Scores over Time.

Radiology·2026
Same author

Risk Stratification for Breast Cancer Screening: <i>AJR</i> Expert Panel Narrative Review.

AJR. American journal of roentgenology·2026
Same author

A Deep Learning Breast Cancer Risk Model for Precise Supplemental Screening.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

Performance of an image-only deep learning breast cancer risk model with the addition of a polygenic risk score.

British journal of cancer·2026
Same author

Radiotherapy With a 12-Gene Expression Assay for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA oncology·2025

Radiologist performance in screening mammography generally exceeds benchmarks, though nearly half have higher recall rates than recommended. This audit provides benchmarks for mammography quality assessment.

Area of Science:

  • Radiology
  • Public Health
  • Breast Cancer Screening

Background:

  • Screening mammography is crucial for early breast cancer detection.
  • Establishing performance benchmarks is essential for quality assurance in mammography.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To retrospectively evaluate radiologist performance in screening mammography.
  • To develop performance benchmarks for U.S. radiologists using a representative sample.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 2,580,151 screening mammograms from 1,117,390 women (1996-2002).
  • Data from 807 radiologists across 188 facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC).
  • Calculated metrics included recall rates, positive predictive values (PPVs), and cancer detection rates.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The middle 50% of radiologists had a median recall rate of 9.8% and PPV(1) of 4.8%.
  • Median cancer detection rate was 4.7 per 1000 women.
  • Median size of invasive cancers detected was 13 mm.

Conclusions:

  • Most radiologists in the BCSC meet or exceed recommended cancer outcome performance standards.
  • Nearly half of radiologists exhibit recall rates exceeding recommended levels.