BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (1996) 69, 10-14
© 1996 British Institute of Radiology
doi:
Services
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 Pauli, R.
Right arrow Articles by Ansell, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pauli, R.
Right arrow Articles by Ansell, J.

The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 69, Issue 817 10-14, Copyright © 1996 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Radiographers as film readers in screening mammography: an assessment of competence under test and screening conditions

R Pauli, S Hammond, J Cooke and J Ansell
School of Psychology and Counselling, Roehampton Institute, London, UK.

The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of radiographers as film readers in screening mammography. Seven radiographers received training in mammogram interpretation at a National Health Service (NHS) Breast Screening Training Centre. Film reading performance was assessed over a period of 1 year after training with test sets of selected screening mammograms. Actual screening performance on contemporary screening mammograms was monitored after training in relation to radiologist decisions and screening outcome. It was found that trained radiographers read mammograms to a standard comparable with that of radiologists. Film reading skills were maintained consistently over the period of this study and transferred to actual screening performance. It was concluded that radiographers could play a useful role as second readers in screening mammography. Training needs have to be assessed in relation to the role the film reading radiographer is to adopt.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
L. E. M. Duijm, J. H. Groenewoud, J. Fracheboud, and H. J. de Koning
Additional Double Reading of Screening Mammograms by Radiologic Technologists: Impact on Screening Performance Parameters
J Natl Cancer Inst, August 1, 2007; 99(15): 1162 - 1170.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. H. Sumkin, H. M. Klaman, M. Graham, T. Ruskauff, R. C. Gennari, J. L. King, A. H. Klym, M. A. Ganott, and D. Gur
Prescreening Mammography by Technologists: A Preliminary Assessment
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2003; 180(1): 253 - 256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
S Brealey and A J Scally
Bias in plain film reading performance studies
Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2001; 74(880): 307 - 316.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
E P Sonnex, A D Tasker, and R A Coulden
The role of preliminary interpretation of chest radiographs by radiographers in the management of acute medical problems within a cardiothoracic centre
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2001; 74(879): 230 - 233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. M. Friedenberg
The Role of the Supertechnologist
Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 630 - 633.
[Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
J. M. Tonita, J. P. Hillis, and C.-H. Lim
Medical Radiologic Technologist Review: Effects on a Population-based Breast Cancer Screening Program
Radiology, May 1, 1999; 211(2): 529 - 533.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 1996 by the British Institute of Radiology.