Abstract

PCIPS CORE SUPPORT The PCIPS will be supported by three cores: the Screening Process Documentation Unit, the Biostatistics Core, and the Administrative Core, each described briefly below Screening Process Documentation Unit: The foundation of the PCIPS is the Screening Process Documentation Unit (SPDU), an innovative data core that integrates data from a range of sources to create a comprehensive picture of the screening process across a diverse population of women in the Delaware Valley. This comprehensive picture includes longitudinal information about the screening process as well as multi-level information about the systems in which women are seen and the communities in which they live. By pulling these data together into a cohesive whole (entitled the Breast Screening Data Repository or BSDR) (Figure 2), insight can be gained into the determinants of screening outcomes across a population, and perhaps even more importantly, into where this process can be improved.

  Funding Agency

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Specialized Center--Cooperative Agreements (U54)
Project #
5U54CA163313-03
Application #
8568129
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1-SRLB-R)
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
2013-06-01
Budget End
2014-05-31
Support Year
3
Fiscal Year
2013
Total Cost
$245,701
Indirect Cost
$91,250

  Institution

Name
University of Pennsylvania
Department
Type
DUNS #
042250712
City
Philadelphia
State
PA
Country
United States
Zip Code
19104

  Publications

McCarthy, Anne Marie; Barlow, William E; Conant, Emily F et al. (2018) Breast Cancer With a Poor Prognosis Diagnosed After Screening Mammography With Negative Results. JAMA Oncol 4:998-1001
Conant, Emily F; Sprague, Brian L; Kontos, Despina (2018) Beyond BI-RADS Density: A Call for Quantification in the Breast Imaging Clinic. Radiology 286:401-404
Seitz, Holli H; Schapira, Marilyn M; Gibson, Laura A et al. (2018) Explaining the effects of a decision intervention on mammography intentions: The roles of worry, fear and perceived susceptibility to breast cancer. Psychol Health 33:682-700
Gastounioti, Aimilia; Oustimov, Andrew; Hsieh, Meng-Kang et al. (2018) Using Convolutional Neural Networks for Enhanced Capture of Breast Parenchymal Complexity Patterns Associated with Breast Cancer Risk. Acad Radiol 25:977-984
McDonald, Elizabeth S; McCarthy, Anne Marie; Weinstein, Susan P et al. (2017) BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. Radiology 285:778-787
Conant, Emily F; Keller, Brad M; Pantalone, Lauren et al. (2017) Agreement between Breast Percentage Density Estimations from Standard-Dose versus Synthetic Digital Mammograms: Results from a Large Screening Cohort Using Automated Measures. Radiology 283:673-680
Wood, Marie E; Sprague, Brian L; Oustimov, Andrew et al. (2017) Aspirin use is associated with lower mammographic density in a large screening cohort. Breast Cancer Res Treat 162:419-425
Balasubramanian, Bijal A; Garcia, Michael P; Corley, Douglas A et al. (2017) Racial/ethnic differences in obesity and comorbidities between safety-net- and non safety-net integrated health systems. Medicine (Baltimore) 96:e6326
Weiss, Julie E; Goodrich, Martha; Harris, Kimberly A et al. (2017) Challenges With Identifying Indication for Examination in Breast Imaging as a Key Clinical Attribute in Practice, Research, and Policy. J Am Coll Radiol 14:198-207.e2
Haas, Jennifer S; Barlow, William E; Schapira, Marilyn M et al. (2017) Primary Care Providers' Beliefs and Recommendations and Use of Screening Mammography by their Patients. J Gen Intern Med 32:449-457

Showing the most recent 10 out of 52 publications