Service and clinical impacts of reader bias in breast cancer screening: a retrospective study.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors influencing reader agreement in breast screening and investigate the relationship between agreement level and patient outcomes. METHODS: Reader pair agreement for 83 265 sets of mammograms from the Scottish Breast Screening service (2015-2020) was evaluated using Cohen's kappa statistic. Each mammography examination was read by two readers, per routine screening practice, with the second initially blinded but able to choose to view the first reader's opinion. If the two readers disagreed, a third reader arbitrated. Variation in reader agreement was examined by whether the reader acted as the first or second reader, reader experience, and recall, cancer detection and arbitration recall rate. RESULTS: Readers' opinions varied by whether they acted as the first or second reader. Furthermore, reader 2 was more likely to agree with reader 1 if reader 1 was more experienced than they were, and less likely to agree if they themselves were more experienced than reader 1 (P < .001). Agreement was not significantly associated with cancer detection rate, overall recall rate or arbitration recall rates (P > .05). Lower agreement between readers led to a higher arbiter workload (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In mammography screening, the second reader's opinion is influenced by the first reader's opinion, with the degree of influence dependent on the readers' relative experience levels. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE While less-experienced readers relied on their more experienced reading partner, no adverse impact on service outcomes was observed. Allowing access to the first reader's opinion may benefit newly qualified readers, but reduces independent evaluation, which may lower cancer detection rates.