ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2012
Web-based mammography audit feedback.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and narrative synthesis of computerized audit and feedback systems in healthcare.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Pooled it
- Multi-method laboratory user evaluation of an actionable clinical performance information system: Implications for usability and patient safety.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2018Article
- Breast cancer mammographic diagnosis performance in a public health institution: a retrospective cohort study.Insights into imaging · 2017Article
- Interface design recommendations for computerised clinical audit and feedback: Hybrid usability evidence from a research-led system.International journal of medical informatics · 2016Article
- Computer-supported feedback message tailoring: theory-informed adaptation of clinical audit and feedback for learning and behavior change.Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
- Article
- Experiences with a self-test for Dutch breast screening radiologists: lessons learnt.European radiology · 2014Article
- Mammographic interpretation: radiologists' ability to accurately estimate their performance and compare it with that of their peers.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveInterpreting screening mammography accurately is challenging and requires ongoing education to maintain and improve interpretative skills. Recognizing this, many countries with organized breast screening programs have developed audit and feedback systems using national performance data to help radiologists assess and improve their skills. We developed and tested an interactive Website to provide screening and diagnostic mammography audit feedback with comparisons to national and regional benchmarks. MATERIALS AND
methodsRadiologists who participate in three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries in the United States were invited during 2009 and 2010 to use a Website that provides tabular and graphical displays of mammography audit reports with comparisons to national and regional performance measures. We collected data about the use and perceptions of the Website.
resultsThirty-five of 111 invited radiologists used the Website from one to five times in a year. The most popular measure was sensitivity for both screening and diagnostic mammography, whereas a table with all measures was the most visited page. Of the 13 radiologists who completed the postuse survey, all found the Website easy to use and navigate, 11 found the benchmarks useful, and nine reported that they intended to improve a specific outcome measure that year.
conclusionAn interactive Website to provide customized mammography audit feedback reports to radiologists has the potential to be a powerful tool in improving interpretive performance. The conceptual framework of customized audit feedback reports can also be generalized to other imaging tests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.