FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4295359745> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4295359745 endingPage "109" @default.
• W4295359745 startingPage "102" @default.
• W4295359745 abstract "Background Double reading can be used in screening mammography, but it is labor intensive. There is limited evidence on whether trained radiographers (ie, technologists) may be used to provide double reading. Purpose To compare the performance of radiologists and radiographers double reading screening mammograms, considering reader experience level. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, performance and experience data were obtained for radiologists and radiographer readers of all screening mammograms in England from April 2015 to March 2016. Cancer detection rate (CDR), recall rate (RR), and positive predictive value (PPV) of recall based on biopsy-proven findings were calculated for first readers. Performance metrics were analyzed according to reader professional group and years of reading experience using the analysis of variance test. P values less than .05 were considered to indicate statistically significant difference. Results During the study period, 401 readers (224 radiologists and 177 radiographers) double read 1 404 395 screening digital mammograms. There was no difference in CDR between radiologist and radiographer readers (mean, 7.84 vs 7.53 per 1000 examinations, respectively; P = .08) and no difference for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or fewer years of experience, regardless of professional group (mean, 7.75 vs 7.71 per 1000 examinations respectively, P = .87). No difference in the mean RR was observed between radiologists and radiographer readers (5.0% vs 5.2%, respectively, P = .63). A lower RR was seen for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or fewer, regardless of professional group (mean, 4.8% vs 5.8%, respectively; P = .001). No variation in PPV was observed between them (P = .42), with PPV values of 17.1% for radiologists versus 16.1% for radiographers. A higher PPV was seen for readers with more than 10 years of experience compared with 5 years or less, regardless of professional group (mean, 17.5% and 14.9%, respectively; P = .02). Conclusion No difference in performance was observed between radiographers and radiologists reading screening mammograms in a program that used double reading. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Hooley and Durand in this issue." @default.
• W4295359745 created "2022-09-13" @default.
• W4295359745 creator A5002466512 @default.
• W4295359745 creator A5029482599 @default.
• W4295359745 creator A5043620745 @default.
• W4295359745 creator A5050543499 @default.
• W4295359745 creator A5070943344 @default.
• W4295359745 date "2023-01-01" @default.
• W4295359745 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4295359745 title "Performance of Radiologists and Radiographers in Double Reading Mammograms: The UK National Health Service Breast Screening Program" @default.
• W4295359745 cites W1878090051 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W1991288524 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2013622592 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2018747379 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2020506948 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2030693399 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2049232775 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2078003738 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2098985260 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2139957534 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2151372529 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2153130422 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2158256125 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2159081982 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2169051766 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2342240067 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W2789621649 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W3005581096 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W3089075967 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W3132418914 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W3206841404 @default.
• W4295359745 cites W3213309855 @default.
• W4295359745 doi "https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.212951" @default.
• W4295359745 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36098643" @default.
• W4295359745 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4295359745 type Work @default.
• W4295359745 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W4295359745 countsByYear W42953597452023 @default.
• W4295359745 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4295359745 hasAuthorship W4295359745A5002466512 @default.
• W4295359745 hasAuthorship W4295359745A5029482599 @default.
• W4295359745 hasAuthorship W4295359745A5043620745 @default.
• W4295359745 hasAuthorship W4295359745A5050543499 @default.
• W4295359745 hasAuthorship W4295359745A5070943344 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C100660578 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C151730666 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C2777267654 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C2780472235 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C2985322473 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C2985394991 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C2987098735 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C3018023364 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C100660578 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C121608353 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C126322002 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C126838900 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C138885662 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C151730666 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C154945302 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C17744445 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C19527891 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C199539241 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C2777267654 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C2780472235 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C2985322473 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C2985394991 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C2987098735 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C3018023364 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C41008148 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C41895202 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C530470458 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C554936623 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C71924100 @default.
• W4295359745 hasConceptScore W4295359745C86803240 @default.
• W4295359745 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W4295359745 hasLocation W42953597451 @default.
• W4295359745 hasLocation W42953597452 @default.
• W4295359745 hasOpenAccess W4295359745 @default.
• W4295359745 hasPrimaryLocation W42953597451 @default.
• W4295359745 hasRelatedWork W1965088735 @default.
• W4295359745 hasRelatedWork W2078710233 @default.
• W4295359745 hasRelatedWork W2283928068 @default.
• W4295359745 hasRelatedWork W2426980442 @default.
• W4295359745 hasRelatedWork W2528488306 @default.

• next