Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 11;11:395. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-79880-0

Table 4.

Comparison of the false positive rate, biopsy rate, and sensitivity between the radiologist’s BI-RADS assessment and the proposed nomogram.

False positive rate Biopsy rate Sensitivity
Development cohort Validation cohort Development cohort Validation cohort Development cohort Validation cohort

Radiologist’s

BI-RADS ≥ 4A

68

(62, 73)

[173/256]

97

(95, 99)

[151/155]

72

(67, 77)

[215/299]

98

(96, 100)

[160/164]

98

(88, 100)

[42/43]

100

(66, 100)

[9/9]

Nomogram ≥ 114

31

(26, 37)

[80/256]

45

(37, 52)

[69/155]

41

(35, 46)

[121/299]

48

(40, 55)

[78/164]

95

(84, 99)

[41/43]

100

(66, 100)

[9/9]

P value  < .001  < .001  < .001  < .001 .317 NA

Data in parentheses are the 95% confidence intervals, and the data in brackets are the numerators/denominators.

BI-RADS, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.