Dear AuntMinnie Member,
The controversy over the effectiveness of screening mammography is grabbing headlines again, this time after a pair of articles in the September issue of Radiology pitted some of the debate's most prominent researchers against each other.
Taking the antimammography stance is a group led by Dr. Peter Gøtzsche and Dr. Karsten Jørgensen of the Nordic Cochrane Centre, who have long bedeviled mammography proponents by claiming that screening mammography is ineffective and leads to overdiagnosis. They believe that mammography is a multibillion-dollar industry that's protected by vocal advocacy groups and vested economic interests.
On the other side of the debate is a group led by Dr. Daniel Kopans of Massachusetts General Hospital, one of screening mammography's staunchest defenders. Kopans and colleagues counter that the Cochrane group's assertions of overdiagnosis are unsupported by scientific evidence, particularly the claim that some tumors might "spontaneously regress" if left alone.
Which side do you fall on? Learn more about the articles in a story by associate editor Kate Madden Yee by clicking here, or visit our Women's Imaging Digital Community at women.auntminnie.com.
Do radiologists overestimate malpractice risk?
In other news, radiologists frequently bemoan their exposure to malpractice litigation, but a new study published yesterday in the New England Journal of Medicine indicates that they are actually far down the list in terms of medical specialists at highest risk of lawsuits.
Not only are there fewer lawsuits filed against radiologists than against some of the high-risk specialties, but payouts are smaller in imaging-related cases, according to an article by international editor Eric Barnes in our Imaging Leaders Digital Community.
Does the new study indicate that radiologists are whiners? Or are there other factors at work that might explain the phenomenon? Make up your own mind by clicking here, or visit the community at leaders.auntminnie.com.
