HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hardesty, L. A. Articles by Gur, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hardesty, L. A. Articles by Gur, D. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Is Maximum Positive Predictive Value a Good Indicator of an Optimal Screening Mammography Practice?

¹ All authors: Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Magee Women's Hospital, 300 Halket St., Ste. 4200, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. Positive predictive value (PPV1) has been used as one important indicator of the quality of screening mammography programs. We show how the relationship between sensitivity and recall rate may affect the operating point at which optimal (maximum) PPV1 occurs.

CONCLUSION. Optimal (maximum) PPV1 can occur at any sensitivity level and should not be used as the sole indicator for practice optimization because it does not take into account the number of cancers that would be missed at that sensitivity.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J. Schell, B. C. Yankaskas, R. Ballard-Barbash, B. F. Qaqish, W. E. Barlow, R. D. Rosenberg, and R. Smith-Bindman Evidence-based Target Recall Rates for Screening Mammography Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 681 - 689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]