Iranian Journal of Radiology

Published by: Kowsar

Mammography Quality in Turkey: Auditors’ Report on a Nationwide Survey

Arzu Ozsoy 1 , * , Erkin Aribal 2 , Levent Araz 1 , Merter Bora Erdogdu 3 , Aydin Sari 3 , Irfan Sencan 3 and Nevra Elmas 4
Authors Information
1 Department of Radiology, Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
2 Department of Radiology, Marmara University Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
3 Ministry of Health of Turkey, Ankara, Turkey
4 Department of Radiology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey
Article information
  • Iranian Journal of Radiology: January 2017, 14 (1); e13470
  • Published Online: June 20, 2016
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: September 18, 2015
  • Revised: October 27, 2015
  • Accepted: December 22, 2015
  • DOI: 10.5812/iranjradiol.32936

To Cite: Ozsoy A, Aribal E, Araz L, Bora Erdogdu M, Sari A, et al. Mammography Quality in Turkey: Auditors’ Report on a Nationwide Survey, Iran J Radiol. 2017 ; 14(1):e13470. doi: 10.5812/iranjradiol.32936.

Copyright © 2016, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Iranian Society of Radiology. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Luke C, Priest K, Roder D. Changes in incidence of in situ and invasive breast cancer by histology type following mammography screening. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2006; 7(1): 69-74[PubMed]
  • 2. World Health Organization . WHO Position Paper on Mammography Screening. 2014; [PubMed]
  • 3. Eklund GW, Cardenosa G, Parsons W. Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality. Radiology. 1994; 190(2): 297-307[DOI][PubMed]
  • 4. Reis C, Pascoal A, Sakellaris T, Koutalonis M. Quality assurance and quality control in mammography: a review of available guidance worldwide. Insights Imaging. 2013; 4(5): 539-53[DOI][PubMed]
  • 5. Ciraj-Bjelac O, Avramova-Cholakova S, Beganovic A, Economides S, Faj D, Gershan V, et al. Image quality and dose in mammography in 17 countries in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe: results from IAEA projects. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(9): 2161-8[DOI][PubMed]
  • 6. Baskan S, Atahan K, Arıbal E, Ozaydın N, Balci P, Yavuz E. Screening and diagnosis in breast cancer (Istanbul breast cancer consensus conference 2010). J Breast Health. 2012; 8: 100-25
  • 7. Taplin SH, Rutter CM, Finder C, Mandelson MT, Houn F, White E. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002; 178(4): 797-803[DOI][PubMed]
  • 8. ACR (American College of Radiology) . Mammography Quality Control Manual. 1999;
  • 9. de Wolf CJM, Perry NM. European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening. 1996; : 7-218
  • 10. Li Y, Poulos A, McLean D, Rickard M. A review of methods of clinical image quality evaluation in mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2010; 74(3): 122-31[DOI][PubMed]
  • 11. TRD (Turkish Society of Radiology) Breast Study Group . Mammograpy quality standards. 2005; : 1-65
  • 12. Destouet JM, Bassett LW, Yaffe MJ, Butler PF, Wilcox PA. The ACR's Mammography Accreditation Program: ten years of experience since MQSA. J Am Coll Radiol. 2005; 2(7): 585-94[DOI][PubMed]
  • 13. Hendrick RE, Helvie MA. United States Preventive Services Task Force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196(2): 112-6[DOI][PubMed]
  • 14. Hwang YS, Tsai HY, Chen CC, Tsay PK, Pan HB, Hsu GC, et al. Effects of quality assurance regulatory enforcement on performance of mammography systems: evidence from large-scale surveys in Taiwan. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 201(2): 307-12[DOI][PubMed]
  • 15. Gurdemir B, Aribal E. Assessment of mammography quality in Istanbul. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2012; 18(5): 468-72[DOI][PubMed]
  • 16. Moon WK, Kim TJ, Cha JH, Cho KS, Choi EW, Lee YJ, et al. Clinical image evaluation of mammograms: a national survey. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2003; 49(6): 507-11
  • 17. Bassett LW, Farria DM, Bansal S, Farquhar MA, Wilcox PA, Feig SA. Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. Radiology. 2000; 215(3): 698-702[DOI][PubMed]
  • 18. Brnic Z, Blaskovic D, Klasic B, Ramac JP, Flegaric-Bradic M, Stimac D, et al. Image quality of mammography in Croatian nationwide screening program: comparison between various types of facilities. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(4): 478-85[DOI][PubMed]
  • 19. Gwak YJ, Kim HJ, Kwak JY, Son EJ, Ko KH, Lee JH, et al. Clinical image evaluation of film mammograms in Korea: comparison with the ACR standard. Korean J Radiol. 2013; 14(5): 701-10[DOI][PubMed]
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments