posted on 2010-06-03, 09:09authored byHazel J. Scott, Andrew Evans, Alastair Gale, Alison Murphy, Jacquie Reed
Incidence of cancer in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) is relatively low (approximately 7% per
1,000 cases screened). As such, feedback from cancers missed or interval cancers can be a relatively lengthy process
(whereby a woman will not present for corroborating imaging for a further three years). Therefore in order to monitor
their radiological skill, all breast screening radiologists and technologists read a self-assessed, standard set of
challenging mammographic images bi-yearly. This scheme, ‘PERFORMS’ (Personal Performance in Mammographic
Screening) has been running since near the inception of the NHSBSP in 1991. Although PERFORMS has functioned as
an educational tool for film-readers on the UKBSP for decades, its relation to real life screening in past years has
proven to be somewhat equivocal (Cowley & Gale, 1999). The present study investigated the relationship between
performance measures in real life and their equivalent on the PERFORMS self assessment scheme namely: Miss Rate
(FN), Cases Arbitrated and Returned to Routine screening and Incorrect recall (FP), Specificity (TN) and Cancer
Detection (TP). Over 40 individuals from one NHS region in the UK submitted their real life data for comparison with
PERFORMS results from the same time frame. Data from this initial study were taken from the year 2005-2006 and
compared with the relevant PERFORMS set of cases. Results indicated a significant positive correlation between
PERFORMS performance measures and performance measures for real life. These results are discussed in the light of
the legitimacy of self-assessment comparative to film-reading skill (during real life clinical practice).
History
School
Science
Department
Computer Science
Citation
SCOTT, H.J. ... et al., 2009. The relationship between real life breast screening and an annual self assessment scheme. IN: Medical Imaging 2009: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, edited by Berkman Sahiner and David J. Manning, Proc. SPIE 7263,72631E (2009)
Copyright 2009 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers. One print or electronic copy may be made for personal use only. Systematic electronic or print reproduction and distribution, duplication of any material in this paper for a fee or for commercial purposes, or modification of the content of the paper are prohibited. This paper can also be found at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.811003