How many millions were spent on this study about the varying reading accuracy based on experience? Like we didn't already know about this???? They should have put the money into real research for a cure!!
Based on a study of doctor's performance in interpreting more than 1 million mammograms from three states and the city of San Francisco, the team found that doctors with at least 25 years of experience who read more than 2,500 mammograms annually and who do general screening are about 30 percent better at detecting cancerous tumors than are doctors who read less than 780 mammograms a year.The more experienced doctors have similarly lower rates of false-positive findings, which save women from unnecessary and invasive biopsies."This study highlighted the extreme variability between physicians in reading mammograms, and any woman ought to know that the accuracy she can expect varies widely," said lead researcher Philip Chu, an epidemiologist and specialist in the radiology department at the University of California, San Francisco.Click the link for the rest of the story...
No comments:
Post a Comment