Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25975383›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2015

Radiographers supporting radiologists in the interpretation of screening mammography: a viable strategy to meet the shortage in the number of radiologists.

Gabriela Torres-Mejía, Robert A Smith, María de la Luz Carranza-Flores, Andy Bogart, Louis Martínez-Matsushita, Diana L Miglioretti, Karla Kerlikowske, Carolina Ortega-Olvera, Ernesto Montemayor-Varela, Angélica Angeles-Llerenas and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Errors in Mammography Cannot be Solved Through Technology AloneAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018
    Review
  14. Digital Mammography in Young Women: Is a Single View Sufficient?Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Gabriela Torres-MejíaCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. gtorres@insp.mx.
Robert A SmithAmerican Cancer Society, 250 Williams St., Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA. robert.Smith@cancer.org.
María de la Luz Carranza-FloresCentro de Diagnóstico Digital México-España, Secretaria de Salud Pública del Distrito Federal, Mariano Escobedo No. 148 col. Anáhuac, Ciudad de México D. F., 11320, Mexico. mlcf_13@yahoo.com.mx.
Andy BogartGroup Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, 1730 Minor Ave #1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA. bogart.t@ghc.org.
Louis Martínez-MatsushitaCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. mat_pichu@hotmail.com.
Diana L MigliorettiGroup Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, 1730 Minor Ave #1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA. dmiglioretti@phs.ucdavis.edu.
Karla KerlikowskeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the General Internal Medicine Section, University of California, 4150 Clement St, San Francisco, CA, 94121, USA. karla.Kerlikowske@ucsf.edu.
Carolina Ortega-OlveraCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. ortega.caro@gmail.com.
Ernesto Montemayor-VarelaCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. agersomnia@gmail.com.
Angélica Angeles-LlerenasCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. aangelica@insp.mx.
Sergio Bautista-ArredondoDirección de Economía de la Salud, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, CP. 62100, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico. sbautista@insp.mx.
Gilberto Sánchez-GonzálezDirección de Economía de la Salud, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, CP. 62100, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico. gilberto.sanchez@insp.mx.
Olga G Martínez-MontañezHospital de Oncología, Centro Médico Siglo XXI, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Av. Cuauhtémoc 330, Cuauhtemoc Doctores, Ciudad de México, D.F. 06720, Mexico. ogmartinez@salud.gob.mx.
Santos R Uscanga-SánchezFederación Mexicana de Colegios de Ginecología y Obstetricia, Nueva York 38, Col. Nápoles, Benito Juárez, Ciudad de México, D.F. 03810, Mexico. suscanga@prodigy.net.mx.
Eduardo Lazcano-PonceCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. elazcano@insp.mx.
Mauricio Hernández-ÁvilaCentro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Avenida Universidad No. 655, Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán, Cuernavaca, 62100, , Morelos, Mexico. mhernan@insp.mx.

Funding

NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201100031C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn alternative approach to the traditional model of radiologists interpreting screening mammography is necessary due to the shortage of radiologists to interpret screening mammograms in many countries.

methodsWe evaluated the performance of 15 Mexican radiographers, also known as radiologic technologists, in the interpretation of screening mammography after a 6 months training period in a screening setting. Fifteen radiographers received 6 months standardized training with radiologists in the interpretation of screening mammography using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) system. A challenging test set of 110 cases developed by the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium was used to evaluate their performance. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, false positive rates, likelihood ratio of a positive test (LR+) and the area under the subject-specific Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for diagnostic accuracy. A mathematical model simulating the consequences in costs and performance of two hypothetical scenarios compared to the status quo in which a radiologist reads all screening mammograms was also performed.

resultsRadiographer's sensitivity was comparable to the sensitivity scores achieved by U.S. radiologists who took the test but their false-positive rate was higher. Median sensitivity was 73.3 % (Interquartile range, IQR: 46.7-86.7 %) and the median false positive rate was 49.5 % (IQR: 34.7-57.9 %). The median LR+ was 1.4 (IQR: 1.3-1.7 %) and the median AUC was 0.6 (IQR: 0.6-0.7). A scenario in which a radiographer reads all mammograms first, and a radiologist reads only those that were difficult for the radiographer, was more cost-effective than a scenario in which either the radiographer or radiologist reads all mammograms.

conclusionsGiven the comparable sensitivity achieved by Mexican radiographers and U.S. radiologists on a test set, screening mammography interpretation by radiographers appears to be a possible adjunct to radiologists in countries with shortages of radiologists. Further studies are required to assess the effectiveness of different training programs in order to obtain acceptable screening accuracy, as well as the best approaches for the use of non-physician readers to interpret screening mammography.

Indexed as

Health WorkforceImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMammographyMass ScreeningPhysiciansAdultBreast NeoplasmsDecision TreesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMexicoMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalObserver Variation

Identifiers

PMID25975383
PMCPMC4436872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.