Screening Performance

Yankaskas BC, Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Geller BM, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Ballard-Barbash R, Cutter GR, Barlow WE. Association between mammography timing and measures of screening performance in the United States. Radiology 2005 Feb;234(2):363-73. [View Abstract]

The following tables contain a range of performance parameters pertinent to the screening mammography examinations. These tables are based on the analysis in the published paper listed above that examined the impact of time since previous mammography on screening performance. These tables have been updated with more recent BCSC data than was available at the time the manuscript was in press. Pooling of these data from BCSC registries provides by far the largest reported experience involving mammography practice, allowing the first evaluation in the US of the influence of time since previous mammography on performance parameters.

• Cancer Rate (per 1,000 examinations) and Cancer Detection Rate (per 1,000 examinations) for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Age
• Performance Measures for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Age
• Cancer Rate (per 1,000 examinations) and Cancer Detection Rate (per 1,000 examinations) for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Age & Time (Months) Since Previous Mammography
• Performance Measures for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Age & Time (Months) Since Previous Mammography
• Cancer Rate (per 1,000 examinations) and Cancer Detection Rate (per 1,000 examinations) for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Time (Months) Since Previous Mammography
• Performance Measures for 3,603,832 Screening Mammography Examinations from 1996 to 2006 by Time (Months) Since Previous Mammography