Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Breast Cancer Research and BioMed Central.

This article is part of the supplement: Royal College of Radiologists Breast Group Annual Scientific Meeting 2011

Poster presentation

Early identification of substandard breast screening performers

L Dong*, Y Chen and AG Gale

  • * Corresponding author: L Dong

Author Affiliations

Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

For all author emails, please log on.

Breast Cancer Research 2011, 13(Suppl 1):P13  doi:10.1186/bcr2965


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://breast-cancer-research.com/content/13/S1/P13


Published:4 November 2011

© 2011 Dong et al.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Introduction

All UK breast screeners can voluntarily undertake the PERFORMS scheme, where they examine recent screening cases receiving immediate feedback. Once all individuals have participated, data are calculated on how they performed compared with peers allowing poor performers to be identified. A way of potentially identifying such poor performers much earlier is proposed.

Methods

Information from the last round of the PERFORMS scheme was reanalysed for which the low performance threshold value was known. Data for randomly selected small groups of participants were repeatedly bootstrapped with the aim of artificially determining a threshold of low performance and comparing this with the known actual threshold. Using a varying number from four to 50 participants, a sample of 1,000 randomly selected small groups was constructed for each number of participants. After bootstrapping each small group, a distribution of 1,000 thresholds of low performance was constructed and median values and standard errors of this distribution calculated to determine how the number of participants affected the estimation accuracy.

Results

The standard error of the estimated threshold reduced as group size increased, indicating better estimation accuracy. Using data from as few as 10 people the artificial threshold approached the known actual threshold of poor performance.

Conclusion

Individuals who are performing less than their peers on the scheme can be identified early without all screeners having first taken part. Whilst not an absolute outlier measure, this information can be fed back in a timely manner, so enabling the individual to improve their cancer identification performance.