Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12728182/ below:

Survey of radiology residents: breast imaging training and attitudes

Affiliations

• ¹ Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and UCLA-Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Rm 165-49, Los Angeles, CA 90095-6952, USA.

• PMID: 12728182
• DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2273020046

Item in Clipboard

Lawrence W Bassett et al. Radiology. 2003 Jun.

• ¹ Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and UCLA-Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, 200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Rm 165-49, Los Angeles, CA 90095-6952, USA.

• PMID: 12728182
• DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2273020046

Item in Clipboard

Purpose: To investigate the training and attitudes of residents regarding breast imaging.

Materials and methods: A telephone survey was conducted with 201 4th-year residents (postgraduate medical school year 5) and 10 3rd-year residents (postgraduate medical school year 4) at 211 accredited radiology residencies in the United States and Canada. Survey topics included organization of the breast imaging section, residents' role in the section, clinical practice protocols of the training institution, residents' personal thoughts about breast imaging, and their interest in performing breast imaging in the future.

Results: Of 211 programs, 203 (96%) had dedicated breast imaging rotations; 196 (93%) rotations were 8 weeks or longer; 153 (73%), 12 weeks or longer. Residents dictated reports in 199 (94%) programs. Residents performed real-time ultrasonography (US) in 186 (88%) programs, needle localization in 199 (94%), US-guided biopsy in 174 (82%), and stereotactically guided biopsy in 181 (86%). One hundred eighty-four (87%) residents rated interpretation of mammograms more stressful than they did that of other images, and 137 (65%) believed mammograms should be interpreted by subspecialists. One hundred thirty-five (64%) residents would not consider a fellowship in breast imaging if offered, and 133 (63%) would not want to spend 25% or more of their time in clinical practice on interpretation of mammograms. The most common reasons given for not considering a fellowship or interpretation of mammograms were that breast imaging was not an interesting field, that they feared lawsuits, and that it was too stressful. Fellowships were offered at 53 programs, and at 46 programs, a total of 63 fellows were recruited.

Conclusion: Residency training in breast imaging has improved in terms of time and curriculum. However, a majority of the residents would not consider a fellowship and did not want to interpret mammograms in their future practices.

PubMed Disclaimer

• Breast imaging training and attitudes: update survey of senior radiology residents.

  Bassett LW, Bent C, Sayre JW, Marzan R, Verma A, Porter C. Bassett LW, et al. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Jul;197(1):263-9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.5834. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011. PMID: 21701039

• Massachusetts radiology resident attitudes toward mammography.

  Hardy SM, Kornguth PJ, Baum JK. Hardy SM, et al. J Am Coll Radiol. 2005 May;2(5):432-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.09.011. J Am Coll Radiol. 2005. PMID: 17411850

• Cardiac imaging training in radiology residency programs: a survey of radiology chief residents.

  Minocha J, Yaghmai V, Hammond N, Pyrros AT, Nikolaidis P. Minocha J, et al. Acad Radiol. 2010 Jun;17(6):795-8. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.02.002. Acad Radiol. 2010. PMID: 20457420

• Trends in radiology fellowship training: a Canadian review 2009-2011.

  Ryan J, Khandelwal A, Fasih N. Ryan J, et al. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2013 Aug;64(3):176-9. doi: 10.1016/j.carj.2011.12.015. Epub 2012 May 9. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2013. PMID: 22575592 Review.

• A Window to the Real World of Radiology From the Ivory Tower of Academia: The Value of Community Rotations and "Career Training" in Radiology Residency Programs in Canada.

  Alabousi A, Patlas MN, Katz DS. Alabousi A, et al. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2017 Sep-Oct;46(5):351-353. doi: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2016.11.009. Epub 2016 Nov 10. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2017. PMID: 28041658 Review.

• Malpractice claims in interventional radiology: frequency, characteristics and protective measures.

  Magnavita N, Fileni A, Mirk P, Magnavita G, Ricci S, Cotroneo AR. Magnavita N, et al. Radiol Med. 2013 Apr;118(3):504-17. doi: 10.1007/s11547-012-0878-7. Epub 2012 Sep 17. Radiol Med. 2013. PMID: 22986698

• Geographic access and the use of screening mammography.

  Elkin EB, Ishill NM, Snow JG, Panageas KS, Bach PB, Liberman L, Wang F, Schrag D. Elkin EB, et al. Med Care. 2010 Apr;48(4):349-56. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181ca3ecb. Med Care. 2010. PMID: 20195174 Free PMC article.

• The future of mammography: radiology residents' experiences, attitudes, and opinions.

  Baxi SS, Snow JG, Liberman L, Elkin EB. Baxi SS, et al. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jun;194(6):1680-6. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.3735. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010. PMID: 20489113 Free PMC article.

• Misdiagnosis in breast imaging: a statement paper from European Society Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)-Part 1: The role of common errors in radiology in missed breast cancer and implications of misdiagnosis.

  Thomassin-Naggara I, Kilburn-Toppin F, Athanasiou A, Forrai G, Ispas M, Lesaru M, Giannotti E, Pinker-Domenig K, Van Ongeval C, Gilbert F, Mann RM, Pediconi F; EUSOBI Board. Thomassin-Naggara I, et al. Eur Radiol. 2025 May;35(5):2387-2396. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11128-1. Epub 2024 Nov 15. Eur Radiol. 2025. PMID: 39545978 Review.

• A machine learning model based on readers' characteristics to predict their performances in reading screening mammograms.

  Gandomkar Z, Lewis SJ, Li T, Ekpo EU, Brennan PC. Gandomkar Z, et al. Breast Cancer. 2022 Jul;29(4):589-598. doi: 10.1007/s12282-022-01335-3. Epub 2022 Feb 5. Breast Cancer. 2022. PMID: 35122217 Free PMC article.

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3