PERFORMS EQA Evidence

Anytime, Anywhere Mammographic Interpretation Training

In Bust P.D.(Ed.). Contemporary Ergonomics (London). Taylor and Francis
Chen Y., Gale A.G. & Scott H.J.

What makes a good mammographer? Looking at the homogeneity of those groups who perform best and least well on the PERFORMS self assessment scheme

Breast Cancer Research, 10(S19)
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

Mammographic interpretation training: what exactly do film-readers want?

Breast Cancer Research, 10(S22)
Chen Y. & Scott H.J.

How much is enough: factors affecting the optimal interpretation of breast screening mammograms

In Jiang Y. & Sahiner B. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5789
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

The role of perception in ultrasound image interpretation

In Bust P.D.(Ed.). Contemporary Ergonomics (London). Taylor and Francis
Chambers S. & Gale A.G.

Does mammographic practice affect film reading style – Breast Screening vs. Symptomatic Radiologists?

In Eckstein M.P. & Jiang Y. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5749
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

Keeping a breast of the times

In Bust P.D.(Ed.). Contemporary Ergonomics (London) Taylor and Francis
Gale A.G. & Scott H.J.

Breast screening: PERFORMS identifies key mammographic training needs

British Journal of Radiology, 79(S127-S133)
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

Symptomatic and screening film readers – a difference in reading style?

Breast Cancer Research, 8(1), S4
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

Breast ultrasound training scheme

Breast Cancer Research, 8(1), S13
Gale A.G. & Chambers S.

Breast screening: when is a difficult case truly difficult and for whom?

In Eckstein M.P. & Jiang Y. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5749
Scott H.J. & Gale A.G.

Prompting in computer aided detection – a novel approach

In Eckstein M.P. & Jiang Y. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5749
Hatton J.W., Wooding D.S., Gale A.G. & Scott H.J.

Breast Screening Technologists: does real-life case volume affect performance?

In Pisano E. (Ed.). Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Digital Mammography
Scott H.J., Gale A.G. & Wooding D.S.

European Breast Screening Performance: does case volume matter?

In Chakraborty D.P. & Eckstein M.P. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5372
Scott H.J., Gale A.G. & Wooding D.S.

The Effect of Novel Prompts upon Radiologists’ Visual Search of Mammograms

In Chakraborty D.P. & Eckstein M.P. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5372
Hatton J.W., Wooding D.S., Gale A.G. & Scott H.J.

Breast Screening: Experience Versus Expertise

In Chakraborty D.P. & Eckstein M.P. (Eds.). Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, Proc. SPIE 5372
Gale A.G., Scott H.J. & Wooding D.S.

The CAD interface in breast screening: effect of image scale and detail upon transcription accuracy

In Lemke H.U., Vannier M.W., Farman A.G., Doi K. & Reiber J.H.C. (Eds.). Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery (Amsterdam) Elsevier Science
Hatton J.W., Wooding D.S., Gale A.G. & Purdy K.J.

Accuracy of transcribing locations on mammograms: implications for the user interface for recording and assessing breast screening decisions

In Krupinski E.A. (Ed.) Medical Imaging 2003: Image and Performance, Proc. SPIE 5034
Hatton J.W., Wooding D.S., Gale A.G. & Purdy K.J.

PERFORMS – a self assessment scheme for radiologists in breast screening

Seminars in Breast Disease, 6(3)
Gale A.G.

Improving the Accuracy of Mammography: Volume and Outcome Relationships

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 94(5)
Esserman L., Cowley H.C., Eberle C., Kirkpatrick A., Chang S., Berbaum K., & Gale A.G.