Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Inter-observer variability within BI-RADS and RANZCR mammographic density assessment schemes
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

This study compares variability associated with two visual mammographic density (MD) assessment methods using two separate samples of radiologists. The image test-set comprised of images obtained from 20 women (age 42–89 years). The images were assessed for their MD by twenty American Board of Radiology (ABR) examiners and twenty-six radiologists registered with the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR). Images were assessed using the same technology and conditions, however the ABR radiologists used the BI-RADS and the RANZCR radiologists used the RANZCR breast density synoptic. Both scales use a 4-point assessment. The images were then grouped as low- and high-density; low including BIRADS 1 and 2 or RANZCR 1 and 2 and high including BI-RADS 3 and 4 or RANZCR 3 and 4. Four-point BI-RADS and RANZCR showed no or negligible correlation (ρ=-0.029; p<0.859). The average inter-observer agreement on the BI-RADS scale had a Kappa of 0.565; [95% CI = 0.519 – 0.610], and ranged between 0.328–0.669 while the inter-observer agreement using the RANZCR scale had a Kappa of 0.360; [95% CI = 0.308 – 0.412] and a range of 0.078-0.499. Our findings show a wider range of inter-observer variability among RANZCR registered radiologists than the ABR examiners.

Paper Details

Date Published: 24 March 2016
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 9787, Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 97871C (24 March 2016); doi: 10.1117/12.2214932
Show Author Affiliations
Christine N. Damases, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Claudia Mello-Thoms, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Mark F. McEntee, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 9787:
Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment
Craig K. Abbey; Matthew A. Kupinski, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top