References
- Baker J. A., Kornguth P. J., Floyd C. E. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon. Observer variability in lesion description. AJR 1996; 166: 773
- Boyd N. F., Wolfson C., Moskowitz M., et al. Observer variation in the interpretation of xeromammograms. JNCI 1982; 68: 357
- Cicchetti D. V. Assessing inter-rater reliability for rating scales. Resolving some basic issues. Br. J. Psychiat 1976; 129: 452
- Ciccone G., Vineis P., Frigerio A., et al. Inter-observer and intra-observer variability of mammogram interpretation. A field study. Eur. J. Cancer 1992; 28A: 1054
- Cohen J. Weighted kappa. Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol. Bull 1968; 70: 213
- Elmore J. G., Wells C. K., Lee C. H., et al. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N. Engl. J. Med 1994; 331: 1493
- Fleiss J. L. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. John Wiley & Sons, New York 1981
- Jackson V. P. The role of US in breast imaging. Radiology 1990; 177: 305
- Skaane P., Amlie E. A personal-computer semiautomated report-coding system for diagnostic mammography. Eur. J. Radiol 1993; 17: 43
- Stavros A. T., Thickman D., Rapp C. L., et al. Solid breast nodules. Use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196: 123
- van Dam P. A., van Goethem M. L. A., Kersschot E., et al. Palpable solid breast masses. Retrospective single— and multimodality evaluation of 201 lesions. Radiology 1988; 166: 435
- Zonderland H. M., Hermans J., Holscher H. C., et al. Additional value of US to mammography. Profit and loss. Eur. Radiol 1994; 4: 511