获得先前的乳房 X 光筛查结果会影响放射医师工作的特异性,但不会影响灵敏度。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Clinical radiology Pub Date : 2024-09-15 DOI:10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.007
J D Akwo, P D Yun Trieu, M L Barron, T Reynolds, S J Lewis
{"title":"获得先前的乳房 X 光筛查结果会影响放射医师工作的特异性,但不会影响灵敏度。","authors":"J D Akwo, P D Yun Trieu, M L Barron, T Reynolds, S J Lewis","doi":"10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To establish the impact that access to prior mammograms has on radiologists' performance and the influence of radiologists' characteristics and breast density on their subsequent performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight participants independently interpreted 72 digital screening mammograms in two reading sessions using the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologist's classification. In the first reading session, participants were given access to current and prior mammograms. In the second reading session six months later, participants only had access to the current mammograms. Radiologists' specificity, sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, and Jacknife Alternative Free-response ROC (JAFROC) were calculated. A Paired T-test was used to compare readings with and without prior mammograms, and to assess if breast density influenced participants performance. Independent Sample T-test was used to compare performance across radiologists' characteristics. A relative risk analysis was conducted to assess the probability of false positives and false negatives when prior mammograms were available.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Access to prior mammograms improved specificity in dense and non-dense breasts (p≤0.01) and reduced false positives (p = 0.01) but had no effect on sensitivity (p = 0.37), lesion sensitivity (p = 0.67), ROC (p = 0.16), and JAFROC (p = 0.24). Prior mammogram also reduced the probability of false positives (RR = 0.38; 95%CI:0.26-0.57, p<0.0001) without affecting the false negative rate (RR = 1.14; 95%CI:0.88-1.49, p = 0.30). The impact of prior mammograms on performance was not influenced by breast density or radiologists' characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Access to prior mammograms improves radiologists' specificity and reduces false positives without affecting sensitivity and the false negative rate regardless of radiologists' characteristics and breast density.</p>","PeriodicalId":10695,"journal":{"name":"Clinical radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access to prior screening mammograms affects the specificity but not sensitivity of radiologists' performance.\",\"authors\":\"J D Akwo, P D Yun Trieu, M L Barron, T Reynolds, S J Lewis\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To establish the impact that access to prior mammograms has on radiologists' performance and the influence of radiologists' characteristics and breast density on their subsequent performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight participants independently interpreted 72 digital screening mammograms in two reading sessions using the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologist's classification. In the first reading session, participants were given access to current and prior mammograms. In the second reading session six months later, participants only had access to the current mammograms. Radiologists' specificity, sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, and Jacknife Alternative Free-response ROC (JAFROC) were calculated. A Paired T-test was used to compare readings with and without prior mammograms, and to assess if breast density influenced participants performance. Independent Sample T-test was used to compare performance across radiologists' characteristics. A relative risk analysis was conducted to assess the probability of false positives and false negatives when prior mammograms were available.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Access to prior mammograms improved specificity in dense and non-dense breasts (p≤0.01) and reduced false positives (p = 0.01) but had no effect on sensitivity (p = 0.37), lesion sensitivity (p = 0.67), ROC (p = 0.16), and JAFROC (p = 0.24). Prior mammogram also reduced the probability of false positives (RR = 0.38; 95%CI:0.26-0.57, p<0.0001) without affecting the false negative rate (RR = 1.14; 95%CI:0.88-1.49, p = 0.30). The impact of prior mammograms on performance was not influenced by breast density or radiologists' characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Access to prior mammograms improves radiologists' specificity and reduces false positives without affecting sensitivity and the false negative rate regardless of radiologists' characteristics and breast density.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical radiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.007\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定获得以前的乳房X光照片对放射科医生工作表现的影响,以及放射科医生的特征和乳房密度对其后续工作表现的影响:方法:八名参与者在两次读片过程中使用澳大利亚和新西兰皇家放射医师学院的分类标准独立解读了 72 张数字筛查乳房 X 光照片。在第一次判读中,参与者可以查看当前和之前的乳房X光照片。在六个月后的第二次阅读中,参与者只能看到当前的乳房 X 光照片。计算了放射医师的特异性、敏感性、病变敏感性、接收者操作特征曲线(ROC)和Jacknife Alternative Free-response ROC(JAFROC)。采用配对 T 检验比较是否进行过乳房 X 光检查,并评估乳房密度是否会影响参与者的表现。独立样本 T 检验用于比较不同放射医师的工作表现。进行了相对风险分析,以评估在有既往乳房X光照片的情况下出现假阳性和假阴性的概率:结果:获得先前的乳房X光照片提高了致密和非致密乳房的特异性(p≤0.01),减少了假阳性(p = 0.01),但对灵敏度(p = 0.37)、病变灵敏度(p = 0.67)、ROC(p = 0.16)和JAFROC(p = 0.24)没有影响。事先进行乳房 X 光检查也降低了假阳性的概率(RR = 0.38;95%CI:0.26-0.57,p 结论:无论放射医师的特点和乳房密度如何,获得先前的乳房X光照片都能提高放射医师的特异性并减少假阳性,而不影响灵敏度和假阴性率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Access to prior screening mammograms affects the specificity but not sensitivity of radiologists' performance.

Aims: To establish the impact that access to prior mammograms has on radiologists' performance and the influence of radiologists' characteristics and breast density on their subsequent performance.

Methods: Eight participants independently interpreted 72 digital screening mammograms in two reading sessions using the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologist's classification. In the first reading session, participants were given access to current and prior mammograms. In the second reading session six months later, participants only had access to the current mammograms. Radiologists' specificity, sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, and Jacknife Alternative Free-response ROC (JAFROC) were calculated. A Paired T-test was used to compare readings with and without prior mammograms, and to assess if breast density influenced participants performance. Independent Sample T-test was used to compare performance across radiologists' characteristics. A relative risk analysis was conducted to assess the probability of false positives and false negatives when prior mammograms were available.

Results: Access to prior mammograms improved specificity in dense and non-dense breasts (p≤0.01) and reduced false positives (p = 0.01) but had no effect on sensitivity (p = 0.37), lesion sensitivity (p = 0.67), ROC (p = 0.16), and JAFROC (p = 0.24). Prior mammogram also reduced the probability of false positives (RR = 0.38; 95%CI:0.26-0.57, p<0.0001) without affecting the false negative rate (RR = 1.14; 95%CI:0.88-1.49, p = 0.30). The impact of prior mammograms on performance was not influenced by breast density or radiologists' characteristics.

Conclusions: Access to prior mammograms improves radiologists' specificity and reduces false positives without affecting sensitivity and the false negative rate regardless of radiologists' characteristics and breast density.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical radiology
Clinical radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.80%
发文量
528
审稿时长
76 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Radiology is published by Elsevier on behalf of The Royal College of Radiologists. Clinical Radiology is an International Journal bringing you original research, editorials and review articles on all aspects of diagnostic imaging, including: • Computed tomography • Magnetic resonance imaging • Ultrasonography • Digital radiology • Interventional radiology • Radiography • Nuclear medicine Papers on radiological protection, quality assurance, audit in radiology and matters relating to radiological training and education are also included. In addition, each issue contains correspondence, book reviews and notices of forthcoming events.
期刊最新文献
Access to prior screening mammograms affects the specificity but not sensitivity of radiologists' performance. Imaging recommendations for soft-tissue sarcomas: model guidelines from diagnosis to post-treatment follow-up Determination of the diagnostic accuracy of peritoneal biopsy with an 18G cutting needle under ultrasonography guidance and the contribution of CT findings to diagnosis before biopsy (our 8-year clinical experience). Impact of an automated report comparison tool on trainee report modification rate at a tertiary hospital. Contents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1