Cargando…

Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography

BACKGROUND: Reactions to uncertainty in clinical medicine can affect decision making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which radiologists’ reactions to uncertainty influence diagnostic mammography interpretation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional responses to a mailed survey assessed reactions to uncertaint...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carney, Patricia A., Yi, Joyce P., Abraham, Linn A., Miglioretti, Diana L., Aiello, Erin J., Gerrity, Martha S., Reisch, Lisa, Berns, Eric A., Sickles, Edward A., Elmore, Joann G.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1824735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17356992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0036-9
_version_ 1782132696357535744
author Carney, Patricia A.
Yi, Joyce P.
Abraham, Linn A.
Miglioretti, Diana L.
Aiello, Erin J.
Gerrity, Martha S.
Reisch, Lisa
Berns, Eric A.
Sickles, Edward A.
Elmore, Joann G.
author_facet Carney, Patricia A.
Yi, Joyce P.
Abraham, Linn A.
Miglioretti, Diana L.
Aiello, Erin J.
Gerrity, Martha S.
Reisch, Lisa
Berns, Eric A.
Sickles, Edward A.
Elmore, Joann G.
author_sort Carney, Patricia A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reactions to uncertainty in clinical medicine can affect decision making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which radiologists’ reactions to uncertainty influence diagnostic mammography interpretation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional responses to a mailed survey assessed reactions to uncertainty using a well-validated instrument. Responses were linked to radiologists’ diagnostic mammography interpretive performance obtained from three regional mammography registries. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-two radiologists from New Hampshire, Colorado, and Washington. MEASUREMENT: Mean scores and either standard errors or confidence intervals were used to assess physicians’ reactions to uncertainty. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit via generalized estimating equations to assess the impact of uncertainty on diagnostic mammography interpretive performance while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: When examining radiologists’ interpretation of additional diagnostic mammograms (those after screening mammograms that detected abnormalities), a 5-point increase in the reactions to uncertainty score was associated with a 17% higher odds of having a positive mammogram given cancer was diagnosed during follow-up (sensitivity), a 6% lower odds of a negative mammogram given no cancer (specificity), a 4% lower odds (not significant) of a cancer diagnosis given a positive mammogram (positive predictive value [PPV]), and a 5% higher odds of having a positive mammogram (abnormal interpretation). CONCLUSION: Mammograms interpreted by radiologists who have more discomfort with uncertainty have higher likelihood of being recalled.
format Text
id pubmed-1824735
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-18247352007-03-16 Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography Carney, Patricia A. Yi, Joyce P. Abraham, Linn A. Miglioretti, Diana L. Aiello, Erin J. Gerrity, Martha S. Reisch, Lisa Berns, Eric A. Sickles, Edward A. Elmore, Joann G. J Gen Intern Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Reactions to uncertainty in clinical medicine can affect decision making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which radiologists’ reactions to uncertainty influence diagnostic mammography interpretation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional responses to a mailed survey assessed reactions to uncertainty using a well-validated instrument. Responses were linked to radiologists’ diagnostic mammography interpretive performance obtained from three regional mammography registries. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-two radiologists from New Hampshire, Colorado, and Washington. MEASUREMENT: Mean scores and either standard errors or confidence intervals were used to assess physicians’ reactions to uncertainty. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit via generalized estimating equations to assess the impact of uncertainty on diagnostic mammography interpretive performance while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: When examining radiologists’ interpretation of additional diagnostic mammograms (those after screening mammograms that detected abnormalities), a 5-point increase in the reactions to uncertainty score was associated with a 17% higher odds of having a positive mammogram given cancer was diagnosed during follow-up (sensitivity), a 6% lower odds of a negative mammogram given no cancer (specificity), a 4% lower odds (not significant) of a cancer diagnosis given a positive mammogram (positive predictive value [PPV]), and a 5% higher odds of having a positive mammogram (abnormal interpretation). CONCLUSION: Mammograms interpreted by radiologists who have more discomfort with uncertainty have higher likelihood of being recalled. Springer-Verlag 2007-01-18 2007-02 /pmc/articles/PMC1824735/ /pubmed/17356992 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0036-9 Text en © Society of General Internal Medicine 2007
spellingShingle Original Article
Carney, Patricia A.
Yi, Joyce P.
Abraham, Linn A.
Miglioretti, Diana L.
Aiello, Erin J.
Gerrity, Martha S.
Reisch, Lisa
Berns, Eric A.
Sickles, Edward A.
Elmore, Joann G.
Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title_full Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title_fullStr Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title_full_unstemmed Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title_short Reactions to Uncertainty and the Accuracy of Diagnostic Mammography
title_sort reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1824735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17356992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0036-9
work_keys_str_mv AT carneypatriciaa reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT yijoycep reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT abrahamlinna reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT migliorettidianal reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT aielloerinj reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT gerritymarthas reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT reischlisa reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT bernserica reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT sicklesedwarda reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography
AT elmorejoanng reactionstouncertaintyandtheaccuracyofdiagnosticmammography