1
|
Weinfurtner RJ, Lee A, Vincenti K, Gundry K, Hoyt T, Klein K, Merkulov A, Mullen L, O'Brien S, Roubein D, Tseng J, Margolies L. Mentorship Interest in Breast Imaging: Survey Results From the Society of Breast Imaging. J Breast Imaging 2022; 4:161-167. [PMID: 38422426 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbab100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study assessed mentorship interest within the breast radiologist community to guide development of a mentorship program through the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI). METHODS A 19-question survey developed by the SBI mentorship committee was distributed electronically to its members March 16, 2021, to May 7, 2021, to gauge interest in forming a society-sponsored mentorship program. Responses were analyzed, with subgroups compared using chi-square analysis. RESULTS There was an 18% response rate (598/3277), and 65% (381/588) professed interest in an SBI-sponsored mentorship. Respondents were evenly distributed between academic (241/586, 41%) and private practice (242/586, 41%). Most were breast imaging fellowship-trained (355/593, 60%) and identified as female (420/596, 70%). For practice years, 50% (293/586) were late career (11+ years) with the remainder early-mid career (201/586, 34%) or trainees (92/586, 16%). For mentorship content areas, work/life balance was the most popular choice (275/395, 70%) followed by leadership (234/395, 59%). Most respondents were not currently mentors (279/377, 74%) or mentees (284/337, 84%). Those interested in a mentorship relationship were statistically younger (<45 years old, 234/381, 61% vs 31/207, 15%, P < 0.00001), female (289/381, 76% vs 123/207, 59%, P = 0.00003), academics (189/381, 50% vs 48/207, 23%, P < 0.00001), identified as a racial/ethnic minority (138/381, 64% vs 121/297, 15%, P < 0.00001), and fellowship-trained (262/381, 69% vs 88/207, 43%, P < 0.00001). CONCLUSION There is demand, especially among the society's young and minority members, for an SBI-sponsored mentorship program. Work/life balance and leadership were the most popular choices for guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Jared Weinfurtner
- Moffitt Cancer Center, Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Amie Lee
- University of California, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Kerri Vincenti
- Medical Imaging of Lehigh Valley, Diagnostic Radiology, Allentown, PA, USA
| | - Kathleen Gundry
- Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Tamarya Hoyt
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Clinical Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Katherine Klein
- University of Michigan, Department of Radiology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Alex Merkulov
- University of Connecticut Health, Department of Radiology, Farmington, CT, USA
| | - Lisa Mullen
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Sophia O'Brien
- University of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Daniel Roubein
- HSHS St. Mary's Hospital, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Decatur, IL, USA
| | - Joseph Tseng
- Stanford University, Department of Radiology, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Laurie Margolies
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Radiology, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Williams G, Scarpetti G, Bezzina A, Vincenti K, Grech K, Kowalska-Bobko I, Sowada C, Furman M, Gałązka-Sobotka M, Maier CB. How are countries supporting health workers? Data from the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor. Eur J Public Health 2021. [PMCID: PMC8574721 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckab164.060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Health workers have been at the forefront of treating and caring for patients with COVID-19. They were often under immense pressure to care for severely ill patients with a new disease, under strict hygiene conditions and with lockdown measures creating practical barriers to working. This study aims to explore the range of mental health, financial and other practical support measures that 36 countries in Europe and Canada have put in place to support health workers and enable them to do their job. Methods We use data extracted from the COVID-19 Health Systems Response Monitor (HSRM). We only consider initiatives implemented outside of clinical settings where COVID-19 patients are treated, and therefore exclude workplace provisions such as availability of personal protective equipment, working time limits or mandatory rest periods. Results We show that countries have implemented a range of measures, ranging from mental health and well-being support initiatives, to providing bonuses and temporary salary increases. Practical measures such as childcare provision and free transport and accommodation have also been implemented to ensure health workers can get to their workplace and have their children looked after. Other initiatives such as offering continuing professional development credits for knowledge learnt during the crisis were also offered in some countries, albeit less frequently. Conclusions While a large number of initiatives have been introduced, often as ad-hoc measures, their effectiveness in helping staff is unknown in most countries. The effectiveness of these initiatives should be evaluated to inform future crisis responses and strategies for health workforce development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Williams
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, London, UK
| | - G Scarpetti
- Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Berlin, Germany
| | - A Bezzina
- Department for Policy in Health, Ministry of Health, Malta, Malta
| | - K Vincenti
- Department for Policy in Health, Ministry of Health, Malta, Malta
| | - K Grech
- University of Malta, Malta, Malta
| | - I Kowalska-Bobko
- Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - C Sowada
- Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - M Furman
- Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - M Gałązka-Sobotka
- Institute of Health Care Management, Lazarski University, Warsaw, Poland
| | - CB Maier
- Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lo Gullo R, Vincenti K, Rossi Saccarelli C, Gibbs P, Fox MJ, Daimiel I, Martinez DF, Jochelson MS, Morris EA, Reiner JS, Pinker K. Diagnostic value of radiomics and machine learning with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia in predicting malignant upgrade. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021; 187:535-545. [PMID: 33471237 PMCID: PMC8190021 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-06074-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Purpose To investigate whether radiomics features extracted from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients with biopsy-proven atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) coupled with machine learning can differentiate high-risk lesions that will upgrade to malignancy at surgery from those that will not, and to determine if qualitatively and semi-quantitatively assessed imaging features, clinical factors, and image-guided biopsy technical factors are associated with upgrade rate. Methods This retrospective study included 127 patients with 139 breast lesions yielding ADH at biopsy who were assessed with multiparametric MRI prior to biopsy. Two radiologists assessed all lesions independently and with a third reader in consensus according to the BI-RADS lexicon. Univariate analysis and multivariate modeling were performed to identify significant radiomic features to be included in a machine learning model to discriminate between lesions that upgraded to malignancy on surgery from those that did not. Results Of 139 lesions, 28 were upgraded to malignancy at surgery, while 111 were not upgraded. Diagnostic accuracy was 53.6%, specificity 79.2%, and sensitivity 15.3% for the model developed from pre-contrast features, and 60.7%, 86%, and 22.8% for the model developed from delta radiomics datasets. No significant associations were found between any radiologist-assessed lesion parameters and upgrade status. There was a significant correlation between the number of specimens sampled during biopsy and upgrade status (p = 0.003). Conclusion Radiomics analysis coupled with machine learning did not predict upgrade status of ADH. The only significant result from this analysis is between the number of specimens sampled during biopsy procedure and upgrade status at surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roberto Lo Gullo
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Kerri Vincenti
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Carolina Rossi Saccarelli
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Peter Gibbs
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Michael J Fox
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Mortimer B. Zuckerman Research Center, 417 E 68th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Isaac Daimiel
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Danny F Martinez
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Maxine S Jochelson
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Morris
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Jeffrey S Reiner
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA. .,Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|