Forskning ved Københavns Universitet - Københavns Universitet

Forside

Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark. / Bihrmann, Kristine; Jensen, Allan; Olsen, Anne Helene; Njor, Sisse; Schwartz, Walter; Vejborg, Ilse; Lynge, Elsebeth.

I: Journal of Medical Screening, Bind 15, Nr. 1, 2008, s. 23-6.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Bihrmann, K, Jensen, A, Olsen, AH, Njor, S, Schwartz, W, Vejborg, I & Lynge, E 2008, 'Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.', Journal of Medical Screening, bind 15, nr. 1, s. 23-6. https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2008.007055

APA

Bihrmann, K., Jensen, A., Olsen, A. H., Njor, S., Schwartz, W., Vejborg, I., & Lynge, E. (2008). Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark. Journal of Medical Screening, 15(1), 23-6. https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2008.007055

Vancouver

Bihrmann K, Jensen A, Olsen AH, Njor S, Schwartz W, Vejborg I o.a. Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark. Journal of Medical Screening. 2008;15(1):23-6. https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2008.007055

Author

Bihrmann, Kristine ; Jensen, Allan ; Olsen, Anne Helene ; Njor, Sisse ; Schwartz, Walter ; Vejborg, Ilse ; Lynge, Elsebeth. / Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark. I: Journal of Medical Screening. 2008 ; Bind 15, Nr. 1. s. 23-6.

Bibtex

@article{ec635600b24a11ddb04f000ea68e967b,
title = "Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: Evaluation and comparison of the performance of organized and opportunistic screening mammography. METHODS: Women attending screening mammography in Denmark in 2000. The study included 37,072 women attending organized screening. Among these, 320 women were diagnosed with breast cancer during follow-up. Opportunistic screening was attended by 2855 women with 26 women being diagnosed with breast cancer. Data on women attending screening were linked with information on cancer status. Each woman was followed with respect to diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive as well as in situ) for a period of two years. Screening outcome and cancer status during follow-up were combined to assess whether the result of the examination was true-positive, true-negative, false-positive or false-negative. Based on this classification, age-adjusted sensitivity and specificity of organized and opportunistic screening were calculated. RESULTS: Defining BI-RADS(trade mark) 4-5 as a positive screening outcome, the overall sensitivity of opportunistic screening was 33.6{\%} and the specificity was 99.1{\%}. Using BI-RADS(trade mark) 3-5 as positive, the sensitivity was 37.4{\%} and the specificity was 97.9{\%}. Organized screening (which was not categorized according to BI-RADS(trade mark)) had an overall sensitivity of 67.2{\%} and a specificity of 98.4{\%}. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a considerably higher sensitivity in organized screening than in opportunistic screening, while the specificity was fairly similar in the two settings. The findings support implementation of population-based breast screening programmes, as recommended in the 'European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis'.",
author = "Kristine Bihrmann and Allan Jensen and Olsen, {Anne Helene} and Sisse Njor and Walter Schwartz and Ilse Vejborg and Elsebeth Lynge",
note = "Keywords: Breast Neoplasms; Denmark; Female; Humans; Mammography; Mass Screening; Sensitivity and Specificity",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1258/jms.2008.007055",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "23--6",
journal = "Journal of Medical Screening",
issn = "0969-1413",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.

AU - Bihrmann, Kristine

AU - Jensen, Allan

AU - Olsen, Anne Helene

AU - Njor, Sisse

AU - Schwartz, Walter

AU - Vejborg, Ilse

AU - Lynge, Elsebeth

N1 - Keywords: Breast Neoplasms; Denmark; Female; Humans; Mammography; Mass Screening; Sensitivity and Specificity

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - OBJECTIVES: Evaluation and comparison of the performance of organized and opportunistic screening mammography. METHODS: Women attending screening mammography in Denmark in 2000. The study included 37,072 women attending organized screening. Among these, 320 women were diagnosed with breast cancer during follow-up. Opportunistic screening was attended by 2855 women with 26 women being diagnosed with breast cancer. Data on women attending screening were linked with information on cancer status. Each woman was followed with respect to diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive as well as in situ) for a period of two years. Screening outcome and cancer status during follow-up were combined to assess whether the result of the examination was true-positive, true-negative, false-positive or false-negative. Based on this classification, age-adjusted sensitivity and specificity of organized and opportunistic screening were calculated. RESULTS: Defining BI-RADS(trade mark) 4-5 as a positive screening outcome, the overall sensitivity of opportunistic screening was 33.6% and the specificity was 99.1%. Using BI-RADS(trade mark) 3-5 as positive, the sensitivity was 37.4% and the specificity was 97.9%. Organized screening (which was not categorized according to BI-RADS(trade mark)) had an overall sensitivity of 67.2% and a specificity of 98.4%. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a considerably higher sensitivity in organized screening than in opportunistic screening, while the specificity was fairly similar in the two settings. The findings support implementation of population-based breast screening programmes, as recommended in the 'European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis'.

AB - OBJECTIVES: Evaluation and comparison of the performance of organized and opportunistic screening mammography. METHODS: Women attending screening mammography in Denmark in 2000. The study included 37,072 women attending organized screening. Among these, 320 women were diagnosed with breast cancer during follow-up. Opportunistic screening was attended by 2855 women with 26 women being diagnosed with breast cancer. Data on women attending screening were linked with information on cancer status. Each woman was followed with respect to diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive as well as in situ) for a period of two years. Screening outcome and cancer status during follow-up were combined to assess whether the result of the examination was true-positive, true-negative, false-positive or false-negative. Based on this classification, age-adjusted sensitivity and specificity of organized and opportunistic screening were calculated. RESULTS: Defining BI-RADS(trade mark) 4-5 as a positive screening outcome, the overall sensitivity of opportunistic screening was 33.6% and the specificity was 99.1%. Using BI-RADS(trade mark) 3-5 as positive, the sensitivity was 37.4% and the specificity was 97.9%. Organized screening (which was not categorized according to BI-RADS(trade mark)) had an overall sensitivity of 67.2% and a specificity of 98.4%. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a considerably higher sensitivity in organized screening than in opportunistic screening, while the specificity was fairly similar in the two settings. The findings support implementation of population-based breast screening programmes, as recommended in the 'European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis'.

U2 - 10.1258/jms.2008.007055

DO - 10.1258/jms.2008.007055

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 18416951

VL - 15

SP - 23

EP - 26

JO - Journal of Medical Screening

JF - Journal of Medical Screening

SN - 0969-1413

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 8591925