No. of participants

Haneuse et al. 2012 [58]

Volume not generally associated with higher performance, but increases in sensitivity were related to volume for radiologists who read 1000 mammograms per year. Interpretive volume and diagnostic performance have complex multifaceted relationships.


Molins et al. 2008 [59]

Specificity higher with increased volume. No significant differences were shown between radiologist who read less or more than 5000 mammograms per year.


Barlow et al. 2004 [60]

No evidence was observed between radiologist accuracy and years interpreting mammograms or mammographic reading volume.


Miglioretti et al. 2007 [61]

Annual volume was not statistically significantly associated with sensitivity or false-positive rate. Reader characteristics failed to explain variations in performance.


Elmore et al. 2009 [62]

Fellowship training in breast imaging was the only characteristic significantly associated with improved sensitivity.


Cornford et al. 2010 [64]

High volume of reading (more than 25,000/3 years) was associated with higher sensitivity.


Elmore et al. 1998 [65]

Total lifetime number of mammograms read, but not mammograms per year was associated with higher performance.


Esserman et al. 2002 [66]

Radiologists with lower volume of mammographic readings had statistically significantly lower sensitivity than high-volume radiologists.


Reed et al. 2010 [63]

Improved reader performance was found for increased levels of years certified, years of experience, and hours reading per week. Annual mammographic case loads of 5000 or more or between 2000 and 4999, had statistically significantly higher scores than those who read less than 1000 cases per year.


Beam et al. 2003 [67]

ROC curves against annual reading volume showed no relationship.