Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: Working together to advance breast cancer research
only search BCSC website
search entire Web           
Home   |   Data   |   Statistics   |   Tools   |   Collaborations   |   Publications   |   About   |   Links

Frequently Cited BCSC Publications

Methods & Definitions

  1. Public BCSC Web site
  2. BCSC descriptive paper:
  3. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, Ernster VL, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, Barlow WE, Geller BM, Kerlikowske K, Edwards BK, Lynch CF, Urban N, Chrvala CA, Key CR, Poplack SP, Worden JK, Kessler LG. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997 Oct;169(4):1001-8. [Look up in PubMed]

  4. Confidentiality paper:
  5. Carney PA, Geller BM, Moffett H, Ganger M, Sewell M, Barlow WE, Stalnaker N, Taplin SH, Sisk C, Ernster VL, Wilkie HA, Yankaskas B, Poplack SP, Urban N, West MM, Rosenberg RD, Michael S, Mercurio TD, Ballard-Barbash R. Current medicolegal and confidentiality issues in large, multicenter research programs. Am J Epidemiol 2000 Aug 15;152(4):371-8. [View Abstract]

  6. Cancer Data Completeness paper:
  7. Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, Zheng Y, Weaver D, Cutter G, Yankaskas B, Rosenberg R, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Taplin S, Urban N, Geller B. Detection of DCIS in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1546-54

    Note: This paper states that the completeness of cancer capture by BCSC registries is 94.3%.

  8. Screening mammography benchmarks paper:
  9. Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Abraham LA, Sickles EA, Lehman CD, Geller BM, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Buist DS, Weaver DL, Barlow WE, Ballard-Barbash R. Performance benchmarks for screening mammography. Radiology 2006 Oct;241(1):55-66. [View Abstract]

  10. Diagnostic mammography benchmarks paper (including comparison between BCSC and US populations):
  11. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, Geller BM, Leung JW, Rosenberg RD, Smith-Bindman R, Yankaskas BC. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology 2005 Jun;235(3):775-90. [View Abstract]

  12. Definitions of performance measures:
  13. Yankaskas BC, Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Geller BM, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Ballard-Barbash R, Cutter GR, Barlow WE. Association between mammography timing and measures of screening performance in the United States. Radiology 2005 Feb;234(2):363-73. [View Abstract]

  14. Mammography performance guidelines (Angoff approach):
  15. Carney PA, Sickles EA, Monsees BS, Bassett LW, Brenner RJ, Feig SA, Smith RA, Rosenberg RD, Bogart TA, Browning S, Barry JW, Kelly MM, Tran KA, Miglioretti DL. Identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography. Radiology 2010 May;255(2):354-61. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10091636. [View Abstract]

  16. Definition of menopausal status:
  17. Phipps AI, Ichikawa L, Bowles EJ, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL, Buist DS. Defining menopausal status in epidemiologic studies: A comparison of multiple approaches and their effects on breast cancer rates. Maturitas 2010 Sep;67(1):60-6. [View Abstract]

  18. Risk models:
  19. 1 year (should be cited when using risk dataset):

    Barlow WE, White E, Ballard-Barbash R, Vacek PM, Titus-Ernstoff L, Carney PA, Tice JA, Buist DS, Geller BM, Rosenberg R, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K. Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 Sep 6;98(17):1204-14. [View Abstract]

    5 year:

    Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K. Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 2008 Mar 4;148(5):337-47. [View Abstract]

[Return to top]


  1. Breast density and breast cancer risk:
  2. Kerlikowske K, Cook AJ, Buist DS, Cummings SR, Vachon C, Vacek P, Miglioretti DL. Breast cancer risk by breast density, menopause, and postmenopausal hormone therapy use. J Clin Oncol 2010 Aug 20;28(24):3830-7. [View Abstract]

  3. Breast density and mammography performance:
  4. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg R, Rutter CM, Geller BM, Abraham LA, Taplin SH, Dignan M, Cutter G, Ballard-Barbash R. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003 Feb 4;138(3):168-75. Erratum in: Ann Intern Med. 2003 May 6;138(9):771. [View Abstract]

  5. BI-RADS assessment and recommendation concordance:
  6. Taplin SH, Ichikawa LE, Kerlikowske K, Ernster VL, Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Carney PA, Geller BM, Urban N, Dignan MB, Barlow WE, Ballard-Barbash R, Sickles EA. Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. Radiology 2002 Feb;222(2):529-35. [View Abstract]

  7. Mammography performance over time:
  8. Ichikawa LE, Barlow WE, Anderson ML, Taplin SH, Geller BM, Brenner RJ; National Cancer Institute-sponsored Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Time trends in radiologists' interpretive performance at screening mammography from the community-based Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, 1996-2004. Radiology 2010 Jul;256(1):74-82. [View Abstract]

  9. Digital vs film-screen mammography performance:
  10. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Lehman CD, Taplin SH, Sickles EA; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2011 Oct 18;155(8):493-502. doi: 10.1059/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00005. [View Abstract]

[Return to top]