EnhancedRadiology provides high quality radiological exams in a number of imaging modalities. Diagnostic studies are performed in a comfortable setting by caring, well trained technicians using the latest equipment.
One type of Doctor trained to apply their knowledge of medicine and technology to diagnose disease and accidental injury with the use of internal imaging devices such as MRI magnetic resonance imaging scanners.
Since the invention of the x-ray more than one hundred years ago, the ability to see inside the human body has enabled doctors to understand what is the procedure of body work -- and how they don’t. But we’ve come a long way in the last century. Health professionals now use a combination of techniques involving computers, sound waves, magnetism, and more. They can scan our bones, muscles, and organs with remarkably and diagnose diseases and injuries as never before.
Radiologists applying community setting
The interpretation of mammograms varies widely among radiologists applying in a community setting, according to a new study in the September 19 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Younger, more recently trained radiologists had two to four times more false-positive interpretations than older radiologists, the study found.
These findings, culled from the real-world setting, bolster evidence from earlier studies that examined radiologist variability using test sets of mammograms. In this study, Joann G. Elmore, M.D., of the University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, and her coworkers examined results from 24 community radiologists' interpretations of 8,734 screening mammograms from 2,169 women over an eight-and-a-half year period.
The writers radiologists noted and masses
The writers found wide variation in how frequently different radiologists noted masses, calcifications, and other suspicious lesions. For example, one radiologist did not observe any calcifications, while another radiologist noted calcifications in more than 20% of the films read. The radiologists also varied widely in their diagnostic interpretations and recommendations for additional screens and biopsies.
The rate of false-positive readings among the radiologists ranged from 2.6% to 15.9%. However, after adjustment for differences in patient, radiologist, and testing characteristics, the range of false-positive rates narrowed to 3.5% to 7.9%. Women who were younger, were premenopausal, were using hormone replacement therapy at the time of the mammogram, had a family history of breast cancer, or had had a previous biopsy were more likely to have a false-positive result.