Linked Life Data

16076556

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/16076556

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
2006-2-13
pubmed:abstractText
The inter- and intraobserver agreement (K statistic) in reporting according to BI-RADS assessment categories was tested on 12 dedicated breast radiologists, with little prior working knowledge of BI-RADS, reading a set of 50 lesions (29 malignant, 21 benign). Intraobserver agreement (four categories: R2, R3, R4, R5) was fair (0.21-0.40), moderate (0.41-0.60), substantial (0.61-0.80) or almost perfect (>0.80) for one, two, five or four radiologists, or (six categories: R2, R3, R4a, R4b, R4c, R5) fair, moderate, substantial or almost perfect for three, three, three or three radiologists, respectively. Interobserver agreement (four categories) was fair, moderate or substantial for three, six, or three radiologists, or (six categories) slight, fair or moderate for one, six, or five radiologists. Major disagreement occurred for intermediate categories (R3=0.12, R4=0.25, R4a=0.08, R4b=0.07, R4c=0.10). We found insufficient intra- and interobserver consistency of breast radiologists in reporting BI-RADS assessment categories. Although training may improve these results, simpler alternative reporting methods (systems), focused on clinical decision-making, should be explored.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Feb
pubmed:issn
0960-9776
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
15
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
44-51
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2006
pubmed:articleTitle
Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience).
pubmed:affiliation
Centro per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica, Florence, Italy. s.ciatto@cspo.it
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Evaluation Studies