Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2007 Jun 19.
Published in final edited form as: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Dec;187(6):W576–W581. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0126

TABLE 4.

Comparison of Full-Field Digital and Screen-Film Mammographic Techniques in Detecting Phantom Breast Masses of Various Densities

Mass Density Imaging System Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV Accuracy AUC p-

Low FFDM 0.741 0.822 0.661 0.961 0.814 0.484 0.085
SFM 0.748 0.685 0.498 0.954 0.696 0.414
High FFDM 0.988 0.829 0.751 0.998 0.847 0.714 < 0.001
SFM 0.995 0.697 0.587 0.998 0.731 0.621

Note—For calculation of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy, confidence level scores of 3, 4, and 5 were considered positive for each imaging system, and confidence level scores of 1 and 2 were considered negative for each imaging system. All p values were calculated based on the difference in AUC between the two mammographic systems using a paired-sample Student’s t test. PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, AUC = area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, FFDM = full-field digital mammography, SFM = screen-film mammography.