Skip to main content
. 2009 Jun 2;101(11):814–827. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp105

Table 5.

Multivariable models adjusting for patient characteristics, radiologist characteristics, facility characteristics, and a facility random effect (20 019 mammograms, 27 facilities)*

Characteristic Odds of having a positive mammogram given no cancer diagnosis (false-positive rate), OR (95% CI) Odds of having a positive mammogram given a cancer diagnosis (sensitivity), OR (95% CI) Odds of having a cancer diagnosis given a positive mammogram (PPV2),§ OR (95% CI)
Facility structure and organization
    Clinical services
        Interventional services offered (FNA, core or vacuum-assisted biopsy, cyst aspirations, needle localization, or other procedures)
            No 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
            Yes 1.97 (0.94 to 4.10) 1.75 (0.47 to 6.45) 1.41 (0.50 to 4.00)
        Facility is currently short staffed (ie, not enough radiologists)
            Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
            Agree/strongly agree 1.21 (0.92 to 1.58) 1.36 (0.79 to 2.33) 0.83 (0.62 to 1.11)
    Financial and malpractice
        Profit status
            Nonprofit 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
            For profit 0.97 (0.72 to 1.32) 0.91 (0.52 to 1.59) 0.87 (0.63 to 1.20)
        How have medical malpractice concerns influenced recommendations of diagnostic mammograms, ultrasounds, or breast biopsies at your facility following screening mammograms?
            Not changed 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
            Moderately increased/greatly increased 1.48 (1.09 to 2.01) 1.74 (0.94 to 3.23) 0.81 (0.57 to 1.15)
Scheduling process
    Average wait time to schedule diagnostic mammogram
        ≤3 d 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
        >3 d 1.09 (0.76 to 1.57) 1.17 (0.57 to 2.41) 0.99 (0.66 to 1.47)
    Do women wait for interpretation of diagnostic mammogram?
        No, never/yes, some of the time 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
        Yes, all of the time 1.02 (0.72 to 1.45) 1.17 (0.58 to 2.35) 0.88 (0.62 to 1.26)
Interpretation and audit processes
    Interpretive process
        What percentage of diagnostic mammograms are interpreted on-site?
            0 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent) 1.0 (referent)
            100 0.74 (0.30 to 1.85) 3.12 (0.54 to 18.09) 0.74 (0.19 to 2.86)
*

PPV2 = positive predictive value of biopsy; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; FNA = fine-needle aspiration.

False-positive rate is defined as the percentage of mammograms without a cancer diagnoses within 1 year that also have a BI-RADS assessment 4, 5, 0 or 3 with a recommendation for biopsy, surgical consultation, or FNA.

Sensitivity is defined as the percentage of mammograms with a cancer diagnoses within 1 year that also have a BI-RADS assessment 4, 5, 0 or 3 with a recommendation for biopsy, surgical consultation, or FNA.

§

PPV2 is defined as the percentage of mammograms with either a BI-RADS assessment 4, 5, 0 or 3 with a recommendation for biopsy, surgical consultation, or FNA that result in a cancer diagnosis within 1 year.

Value is statistically significant, P = .01 (two-sided F test).