ArticleRadiology2017
National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph
Article in Radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05227261 (Assessment of a Novel Blood Test in Early Detection of the Five Common Cancers Based on the Investigation of the Circulating Tumour DNA), which is not on this map. Cited by 258 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
258citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
51.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.
Assessment of a Novel Blood Test in Early Detection of the Five Common Cancers Based on the Investigation of the Circulating Tumour DNA
Who cites it
258 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 650 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS).The breast journal · 2026Pooled it
- ESR Essentials: screening for breast cancer - general recommendations by EUSOBI.European radiology · 2024Guideline
- Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).British journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Machine Learning for Workflow Applications in Screening Mammography: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Radiology · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Recommending Breast Cancer Screening to My Mum: Examining the Interplay of Threat, Efficacy, and Virality on Recommendation Intention in the Chinese Context.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- A deep learning model integrating mammography and clinical factors facilitates the malignancy prediction of BI-RADS 4 microcalcifications in breast cancer screening.European radiology · 2021Trial
- Rebuttal to "Early Warnings About the Galleri Test Were Disregarded".Clinical proteomics · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer Outcomes From Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Population-Based Cohort Study.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Optimizing AI-assisted decision-making in mammography screening: focusing on uncertainties.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Variability Among Radiologists in Interpreting Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screens.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Article
- Mammo-GAN-Assisted Deep Network Training Scheme for Lesion Detection.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Mammography-Based Radiomics for Prediction of Nodal Status and Disease Burden in Breast Cancer: A Temporally Validated Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Radiomics Analysis to Enhance Breast Lesion Characterization Using QUS Spectral Parametric Imaging.Cancers · 2026Article
- Performance of Statistical and Machine Learning Risk Prediction Models for Advanced Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- How BI-RADS v2025 Helps Patients: New Audits and Method of Detection.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Review
- An Unsupervised Deep Learning Framework for Quantitative Breast Density Estimation from Mammograms.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Early Breast Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of Innovations in Preventive Women's Healthcare.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System v2025: Key Updates in Mammography.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2026Review
198 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Constance D LehmanFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Robert F AraoFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Brian L SpragueFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Janie M LeeFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Diana S M BuistFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Karla KerlikowskeFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Louise M HendersonFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Tracy OnegaFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Anna N A TostesonFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Garth H RauscherFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Diana L MigliorettiFrom the Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, WAC 240, Boston, MA 02114 (C.D.L.); Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Wash (R.F.A., D.S.M.B.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Norris Cotton Cancer Center and Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (T.O., A.N.A.T.); Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Ill (G.H.R.); and Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).
Group Health Cooperative · US
Funding
Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI David Darr · 1985 to 2026
$201.5MTranslational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Steven D Leach · 1985 to 2026
$91.3MStaff InvestigatorsP30CA093373 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI PRIMO N. LARA · 2002 to 2026
$84.9MRisk-based Imaging Strategies to Improve Breast Cancer Surveillance OutcomesP01CA154292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI Diana L Miglioretti · 2011 to 2026
$52.9MVermont Screening Process Documentation UnitU54CA163303 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI SPRAGUE, BRIAN L · 2011 to 2017
$6.4MNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201100031CNCI NIH HHS P01 CA154292NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023108NCI NIH HHS P30 CA093373NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163303
Abstract
Purpose To establish performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography and assess performance trends over time in U.S. community practice. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study measured the performance of digital screening mammography interpreted by 359 radiologists across 95 facilities in six Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries. The study included 1 682 504 digital screening mammograms performed between 2007 and 2013 in 792 808 women. Performance measures were calculated according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, 5th edition, and were compared with published benchmarks by the BCSC, the National Mammography Database, and performance recommendations by expert opinion. Benchmarks were derived from the distribution of performance metrics across radiologists and were presented as 50th (median), 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles, with graphic presentations using smoothed curves. Results Mean screening performance measures were as follows: abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), 11.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5, 11.6); cancers detected per 1000 screens, or cancer detection rate (CDR), 5.1 (95% CI: 5.0, 5.2); sensitivity, 86.9% (95% CI: 86.3%, 87.6%); specificity, 88.9% (95% CI: 88.8%, 88.9%); false-negative rate per 1000 screens, 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7, 0.8); positive predictive value (PPV) 1, 4.4% (95% CI: 4.3%, 4.5%); PPV2, 25.6% (95% CI: 25.1%, 26.1%); PPV3, 28.6% (95% CI: 28.0%, 29.3%); cancers stage 0 or 1, 76.9%; minimal cancers, 57.7%; and node-negative invasive cancers, 79.4%. Recommended CDRs were achieved by 92.1% of radiologists in community practice, and 97.1% achieved recommended ranges for sensitivity. Only 59.0% of radiologists achieved recommended AIRs, and only 63.0% achieved recommended levels of specificity. Conclusion The majority of radiologists in the BCSC surpass cancer detection recommendations for screening mammography; however, AIRs continue to be higher than the recommended rate for almost half of radiologists interpreting screening mammograms.
Indexed as
AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionBenchmarkingBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedRegistriesSensitivity and Specificity
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390
Registered trials
NCT05227261ClinicalTrials.gov
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.