AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, V. P.
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, H. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, V. P.
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, H. E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 157, 25-28, Copyright © 1991 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Diagnostic importance of the radiographic density of noncalcified breast masses: analysis of 91 lesions

VP Jackson, KA Dines, LW Bassett, RH Gold and HE Reynolds
Department of Radiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Wishard Memorial Hospital, Indianapolis 46202.

Radiographic density is considered an important feature in the evaluation of noncalcified breast masses, yet no studies assessing its value have been published. The radiographic densities of 91 biopsy- proved, nonfatty, noncalcified breast masses were evaluated by three mammographers. The density determinations made by each observer were compared with the histologic outcome for the 51 benign and 40 malignant lesions. With the kappa statistic, interobserver agreement was relatively poor (0.22 to 0.49), and intraobserver agreement for one expert mammographer was 0.50. When the majority opinion of the mammographers was used, sensitivity was 48%, specificity was 80%, and both positive and negative predictive values were 66%. As a solitary feature in lesion analysis, mammographic density is difficult to assess and is of limited value for the prediction of the benign or malignant nature of noncalcified breast masses.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W. A. Berg, C. Campassi, P. Langenberg, and M. J. Sexton
Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: Inter- and Intraobserver Variability in Feature Analysis and Final Assessment
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2000; 174(6): 1769 - 1777.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
K. M. Kelly and A. N. Wilkes
Accuracy in Breast Imaging Requires Multiple Views and an Integrated Approach • Dr Wilkes responds:
RadioGraphics, March 1, 1999; 19(2): 280 - 282.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.