Skip Navigation


Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access originally published online on July 24, 2007
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2007 99(15):1141-1143; doi:10.1093/jnci/djm079
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/15/1141    most recent
djm079v1
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 ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Elmore, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Brenner, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Elmore, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Brenner, R. J.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Articles in JNCI
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press.

EDITORIALS

The More Eyes, the Better to See? From Double to Quadruple Reading of Screening Mammograms

Joann G. Elmore, R. James Brenner

Affiliations of authors: Department of Madicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA (JGE); Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA (RJB)

Correspondence to: Joann G. Elmore, MD, MPH, 325 9th Street, Division of General Internal Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Box 359780, Seattle, WA 98104 (e-mail: jelmore@u.washington.edu).

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Clinically important visible abnormalities may go undetected during mammography screening for two main reasons: they are either overlooked or misinterpreted (1). Among women with interval breast cancers that are diagnosed between routine screening mammographic examinations, 10%–20% have lesions that were visible but overlooked at their previous examination, a similar percentage have lesions that were misinterpreted at the previous examination, and the remainder have lesions that were mammographically occult (2,3). For these women, the interval cancers represent lost opportunities for an early diagnosis; for the radiologists who interpreted the mammograms, they may have legal ramifications. Indeed, a delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer was the most common reason for malpractice lawsuits against American physicians in a study of claims resolved between 1995 and 2001 (4).

In an attempt to maximize the number . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Funding


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related Articles in JNCI

Additional Double Reading of Screening Mammograms by Radiologic Technologists: Impact on Screening Performance Parameters
Lucien E. M. Duijm, Johanna H. Groenewoud, Jacques Fracheboud, and Harry J. de Koning
J Natl Cancer Inst 2007 99: 1162-1170. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

IN THIS ISSUE
J Natl Cancer Inst 2007 99: 1137. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Press Release: Additional Mammogram Readers Improve Breast Cancer Detection
Liz Savage and Andrea Widener
J Natl Cancer Inst 2007 99: 1137. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]