FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2032193313> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2032193313 endingPage "290" @default.
• W2032193313 startingPage "286" @default.
• W2032193313 abstract "Rationale and objective To evaluate breast radiologists’ recognition of mammograms showing cancers that they correctly detected or “missed” during clinical interpretations. Materials and methods Two similar experiments were conducted. In the first, 33 bilateral screening mammograms were reviewed by four breast imagers. These included five cancers that each radiologist had detected, two cancers that each radiologist had “missed,” and five mammograms recalled by other radiologists that were not cancer. Radiologists were asked if they had interpreted the mammogram in clinic and if the mammogram was suspicious for cancer. In the second experiment, four different breast imagers reviewed 48 mammograms that included five cancers that each radiologist had detected, two cancers that each radiologist had “missed,” and five mammograms that were recalled by each radiologist but were not cancer. Using chi-square analysis, the performance of the radiologists on screening mammograms they had read in clinic was compared with their performance on mammograms read in clinic by other radiologists. Results Seven of eight radiologists did not remember interpreting any of the mammograms in clinic. One radiologist correctly remembered interpreting one mammogram in clinic, but interpreted it incorrectly. Average performance showed no significant difference (P = .60) between mammograms they had interpreted in clinic and those interpreted by others. Conclusion Radiologists do not remember most mammograms showing cancer that they have interpreted, either correctly or incorrectly, after they are mixed with mammograms showing cancer that were interpreted by other radiologists. Screening mammograms can be used in observer performance studies in which the interpreting radiologist participates as an observer. To evaluate breast radiologists’ recognition of mammograms showing cancers that they correctly detected or “missed” during clinical interpretations. Two similar experiments were conducted. In the first, 33 bilateral screening mammograms were reviewed by four breast imagers. These included five cancers that each radiologist had detected, two cancers that each radiologist had “missed,” and five mammograms recalled by other radiologists that were not cancer. Radiologists were asked if they had interpreted the mammogram in clinic and if the mammogram was suspicious for cancer. In the second experiment, four different breast imagers reviewed 48 mammograms that included five cancers that each radiologist had detected, two cancers that each radiologist had “missed,” and five mammograms that were recalled by each radiologist but were not cancer. Using chi-square analysis, the performance of the radiologists on screening mammograms they had read in clinic was compared with their performance on mammograms read in clinic by other radiologists. Seven of eight radiologists did not remember interpreting any of the mammograms in clinic. One radiologist correctly remembered interpreting one mammogram in clinic, but interpreted it incorrectly. Average performance showed no significant difference (P = .60) between mammograms they had interpreted in clinic and those interpreted by others. Radiologists do not remember most mammograms showing cancer that they have interpreted, either correctly or incorrectly, after they are mixed with mammograms showing cancer that were interpreted by other radiologists. Screening mammograms can be used in observer performance studies in which the interpreting radiologist participates as an observer." @default.
• W2032193313 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5001080493 @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5027846125 @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5042300041 @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5057889376 @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5073729217 @default.
• W2032193313 creator A5076868240 @default.
• W2032193313 date "2005-03-01" @default.
• W2032193313 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2032193313 title "“Memory effect” in observer performance studies of mammograms1" @default.
• W2032193313 cites W2037711351 @default.
• W2032193313 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2004.11.026" @default.
• W2032193313 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15766687" @default.
• W2032193313 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2032193313 type Work @default.
• W2032193313 sameAs 2032193313 @default.
• W2032193313 citedByCount "32" @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132012 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132013 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132014 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132015 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132016 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132017 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132018 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132019 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132020 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132021 @default.
• W2032193313 countsByYear W20321933132022 @default.
• W2032193313 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5001080493 @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5027846125 @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5042300041 @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5057889376 @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5073729217 @default.
• W2032193313 hasAuthorship W2032193313A5076868240 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C2780472235 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C2985322473 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C121608353 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C126322002 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C126838900 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C19527891 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C2780472235 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C2985322473 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C530470458 @default.
• W2032193313 hasConceptScore W2032193313C71924100 @default.
• W2032193313 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2032193313 hasLocation W20321933131 @default.
• W2032193313 hasLocation W20321933132 @default.
• W2032193313 hasOpenAccess W2032193313 @default.
• W2032193313 hasPrimaryLocation W20321933131 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2014447844 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2034811276 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2043014171 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2528488306 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2788650544 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W2802495543 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W3018270146 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W3018364305 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W4362576344 @default.
• W2032193313 hasRelatedWork W4386203006 @default.
• W2032193313 hasVolume "12" @default.
• W2032193313 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2032193313 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2032193313 magId "2032193313" @default.
• W2032193313 workType "article" @default.