65 research outputs found
Reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography.
BackgroundReactions to uncertainty in clinical medicine can affect decision making.ObjectiveTo assess the extent to which radiologists' reactions to uncertainty influence diagnostic mammography interpretation.DesignCross-sectional responses to a mailed survey assessed reactions to uncertainty using a well-validated instrument. Responses were linked to radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretive performance obtained from three regional mammography registries.ParticipantsOne hundred thirty-two radiologists from New Hampshire, Colorado, and Washington.MeasurementMean scores and either standard errors or confidence intervals were used to assess physicians' reactions to uncertainty. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit via generalized estimating equations to assess the impact of uncertainty on diagnostic mammography interpretive performance while adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsWhen examining radiologists' interpretation of additional diagnostic mammograms (those after screening mammograms that detected abnormalities), a 5-point increase in the reactions to uncertainty score was associated with a 17% higher odds of having a positive mammogram given cancer was diagnosed during follow-up (sensitivity), a 6% lower odds of a negative mammogram given no cancer (specificity), a 4% lower odds (not significant) of a cancer diagnosis given a positive mammogram (positive predictive value [PPV]), and a 5% higher odds of having a positive mammogram (abnormal interpretation).ConclusionMammograms interpreted by radiologists who have more discomfort with uncertainty have higher likelihood of being recalled
Comparison of Acquisition Parameters and Breast Dose in Digital Mammography and Screen-Film Mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial
The purpose of our study was to compare the technical performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and screen-film mammography
The Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment: Exploring Fundamental Symmetries of the Universe
The preponderance of matter over antimatter in the early Universe, the
dynamics of the supernova bursts that produced the heavy elements necessary for
life and whether protons eventually decay --- these mysteries at the forefront
of particle physics and astrophysics are key to understanding the early
evolution of our Universe, its current state and its eventual fate. The
Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) represents an extensively developed
plan for a world-class experiment dedicated to addressing these questions. LBNE
is conceived around three central components: (1) a new, high-intensity
neutrino source generated from a megawatt-class proton accelerator at Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory, (2) a near neutrino detector just downstream
of the source, and (3) a massive liquid argon time-projection chamber deployed
as a far detector deep underground at the Sanford Underground Research
Facility. This facility, located at the site of the former Homestake Mine in
Lead, South Dakota, is approximately 1,300 km from the neutrino source at
Fermilab -- a distance (baseline) that delivers optimal sensitivity to neutrino
charge-parity symmetry violation and mass ordering effects. This ambitious yet
cost-effective design incorporates scalability and flexibility and can
accommodate a variety of upgrades and contributions. With its exceptional
combination of experimental configuration, technical capabilities, and
potential for transformative discoveries, LBNE promises to be a vital facility
for the field of particle physics worldwide, providing physicists from around
the globe with opportunities to collaborate in a twenty to thirty year program
of exciting science. In this document we provide a comprehensive overview of
LBNE's scientific objectives, its place in the landscape of neutrino physics
worldwide, the technologies it will incorporate and the capabilities it will
possess.Comment: Major update of previous version. This is the reference document for
LBNE science program and current status. Chapters 1, 3, and 9 provide a
comprehensive overview of LBNE's scientific objectives, its place in the
landscape of neutrino physics worldwide, the technologies it will incorporate
and the capabilities it will possess. 288 pages, 116 figure
Influence of Dopaminergically Mediated Reward on Somatosensory Decision-Making
This pharmacological fMRI study shows that during reward-based sensory decision-making, dopamine is crucially involved in reward-related modulation of human primary sensory cortex
Calreticulin mediates an invasive breast cancer phenotype through the transcriptional dysregulation of p53 and MAPK pathways
β1-Integrin and integrin linked kinase regulate astrocytic differentiation of neural stem cells.
Astrogliosis with glial scar formation after damage to the nervous system is a major impediment to axonal regeneration and functional recovery. The present study examined the role of β1-integrin signaling in regulating astrocytic differentiation of neural stem cells. In the adult spinal cord β1-integrin is expressed predominantly in the ependymal region where ependymal stem cells (ESCs) reside. β1-integrin signaling suppressed astrocytic differentiation of both cultured ESCs and subventricular zone (SVZ) progenitor cells. Conditional knockout of β1-integrin enhanced astrogliogenesis both by cultured ESCs and by SVZ progenitor cells. Previous studies have shown that injection into the injured spinal cord of a self-assembling peptide amphiphile that displays an IKVAV epitope (IKVAV-PA) limits glial scar formation and enhances functional recovery. Here we find that injection of IKVAV-PA induced high levels of β1-integrin in ESCs in vivo, and that conditional knockout of β1-integrin abolished the astroglial suppressive effects of IKVAV-PA in vitro. Injection into an injured spinal cord of PAs expressing two other epitopes known to interact with β1-integrin, a Tenascin C epitope and the fibronectin epitope RGD, improved functional recovery comparable to the effects of IKVAV-PA. Finally we found that the effects of β1-integrin signaling on astrogliosis are mediated by integrin linked kinase (ILK). These observations demonstrate an important role for β1-integrin/ILK signaling in regulating astrogliosis from ESCs and suggest ILK as a potential target for limiting glial scar formation after nervous system injury
Recommended from our members
Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography.
BackgroundAlthough interpretive performance varies substantially among radiologists, such variation has not been examined among mammography facilities. Understanding sources of facility variation could become a foundation for improving interpretive performance.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study conducted between 1996 and 2002, we surveyed 53 facilities to evaluate associations between facility structure, interpretive process characteristics, and interpretive performance of screening mammography (ie, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV1], and the likelihood of cancer among women who were referred for biopsy [PPV2]). Measures of interpretive performance were ascertained prospectively from mammography interpretations and cancer data collected by the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses estimated the association between facility characteristics and mammography interpretive performance or accuracy (area under the ROC curve [AUC]). All P values were two-sided.ResultsOf the 53 eligible facilities, data on 44 could be analyzed. These 44 facilities accounted for 484 463 screening mammograms performed on 237 669 women, of whom 2686 were diagnosed with breast cancer during follow-up. Among the 44 facilities, mean sensitivity was 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 74.3% to 84.9%), mean specificity was 90.2% (95% CI = 88.3% to 92.0%), mean PPV1 was 4.1% (95% CI = 3.5% to 4.7%), and mean PPV2 was 38.8% (95% CI = 32.6% to 45.0%). The facilities varied statistically significantly in specificity (P < .001), PPV1 (P < .001), and PPV2 (P = .002) but not in sensitivity (P = .99). AUC was higher among facilities that offered screening mammograms alone vs those that offered screening and diagnostic mammograms (0.943 vs 0.911, P = .006), had a breast imaging specialist interpreting mammograms vs not (0.932 vs 0.905, P = .004), did not perform double reading vs independent double reading vs consensus double reading (0.925 vs 0.915 vs 0.887, P = .034), or conducted audit reviews two or more times per year vs annually vs at an unknown frequency (0.929 vs 0.904 vs 0.900, P = .018).ConclusionMammography interpretive performance varies statistically significantly by facility
Recommended from our members
Reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography.
BackgroundReactions to uncertainty in clinical medicine can affect decision making.ObjectiveTo assess the extent to which radiologists' reactions to uncertainty influence diagnostic mammography interpretation.DesignCross-sectional responses to a mailed survey assessed reactions to uncertainty using a well-validated instrument. Responses were linked to radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretive performance obtained from three regional mammography registries.ParticipantsOne hundred thirty-two radiologists from New Hampshire, Colorado, and Washington.MeasurementMean scores and either standard errors or confidence intervals were used to assess physicians' reactions to uncertainty. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit via generalized estimating equations to assess the impact of uncertainty on diagnostic mammography interpretive performance while adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsWhen examining radiologists' interpretation of additional diagnostic mammograms (those after screening mammograms that detected abnormalities), a 5-point increase in the reactions to uncertainty score was associated with a 17% higher odds of having a positive mammogram given cancer was diagnosed during follow-up (sensitivity), a 6% lower odds of a negative mammogram given no cancer (specificity), a 4% lower odds (not significant) of a cancer diagnosis given a positive mammogram (positive predictive value [PPV]), and a 5% higher odds of having a positive mammogram (abnormal interpretation).ConclusionMammograms interpreted by radiologists who have more discomfort with uncertainty have higher likelihood of being recalled
- …