Table 2.

Diagnostic performance of FFDM and CESM for all ten readers. Diagnostic performance parameters were presented as percentages with 95 % confidence intervals in parentheses

Reader	Exam	Sensitivity	Specificity
Experienced CESM Reader 1	FFDM	86.4 % (75.0–93.9 %)	67.1 % (58.7–74.8 %)
	CESM	93.2 % (83.5–98.1 %)	86.4 % (79.6–91.6 %)
Experienced CESM Reader 2	FFDM	96.6 % (88.2–99.4 %)	26.4 % (19.3–34.5 %)
	CESM	98.3 % (90.8–99.7 %)	70.7 % (62.4–78.1 %)
Experienced CESM Reader 3	FFDM	94.9 % (85.8–98.9 %)	49.3 % (40.7–57.8 %)
	CESM	100.0 % (93.8–100.0 %)	75.7 % (67.7–82.6 %)
Experienced CESM Reader 4	FFDM	98.3 % (90.8–99.7 %)	15.0 % (9.5–22.0 %)
	CESM	100.0 % (93.8 %–100.0 %)	75.7 % (67.7–82.5 %)
	Mean FFDM	94.1 % (89.6–98.5 %)	39.5 % (19.7–59.2 %)
	Mean CESM	97.6 % (95.1–100 %)	77.1 % (71.5–82.7 %)
Non-Experienced CESM Reader 1	FFDM	98.3 % (90.8–99.7 %)	37.8 % (29.8–56.4 %)
	CESM	100.0 % (93.8–100.0 %)	67.1 % (58.7–74.8 %)
Non-Experienced CESM Reader 2	FFDM	96.6 % (88.2–99.5 %)	21.4 % (14.9–29.1 %)
	CESM	94.9 % (85.8–98.8 %)	64.3 % (55.7–72.2 %)
Non-Experienced CESM Reader 3	FFDM	89.9 % (79.1–96.1 %)	40.7 % (32.5–49.3 %)
	CESM	93.2 % (83.5–98.1 %)	72.8 % (64.7–80.0 %)
	Mean FFDM	94.9 % (90.8–99.0 %)	33.3 % (23.7–42.9 %)
	Mean CESM	95.9 % (92.9–98.9 %)	68.0 % (64.1–72.1 %)
Resident Reader 1	FFDM	89.8 % (79.1–96.1 %)	32.8 % (25.1–41.3 %)
	CESM	96.6 % (88.2–99.4 %)	58.5 % (49.9–66.8 %
Resident Reader 2	FFDM	93.2 % (83.5–98.0 %)	36.4 % (36.4–44.9 %)
	CESM	96.6 % (88.2–99.4 %)	64.2 % (55.7–72.2 %)
Resident Reader 3	FFDM	86.4 % (75.0–93.9 %)	32.1 % (24.5–40.5 %)
	CESM	96.6 % (88.2–99.5 %)	61.4 % (52.8–69.5 %)
	Mean FFDM	89.8 % (79.2–96 %)	33.7 % (28.6–42.2 %)
	Mean CESM	96.6 % (95.4–98.2 %)	61.3 % (52.8–69.5 %)
All Readers Mean	FFDM	93.0 % (90.3–95.8 %)	35.9 % (27.3–44.5 %)
	CESM	96.9 % (93.2–100.0 %)	69.7 % (64.8–74.6 %)