Inter-observer variability within BI-RADS and RANZCR mammographic density assessment schemes

Christine N. Damases; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Mark F. McEntee

doi:10.1117/12.2214932

24 March 2016 Inter-observer variability within BI-RADS and RANZCR mammographic density assessment schemes

Christine N. Damases, Claudia Mello-Thoms, Mark F. McEntee

Proceedings Volume 9787, Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment; 97871C (2016) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2214932
Event: SPIE Medical Imaging, 2016, San Diego, California, United States

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.

Citation Download Citation

Christine N. Damases, Claudia Mello-Thoms, and Mark F. McEntee "Inter-observer variability within BI-RADS and RANZCR mammographic density assessment schemes", Proc. SPIE 9787, Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 97871C (24 March 2016); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2214932

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available