Image quality standards in digital mammography: A consensus statement

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of image quality in screening mammograms can suffer from significant inter- and intra-observer variability leading to inconsistent quality assessment. The purpose of this study is to establish a standardized framework for describing image quality, thereby reducing subjectivity and enhancing observer consistency. METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted to compile a preliminary list of 19 image quality criteria. This preliminary list was evaluated by a multidisciplinary panel of 23 experts through a modified Delphi survey. Experts ranked each criterion based on its "importance for image quality" and "agreement with the phrasing." Criteria for which consensus was not initially achieved were subsequently revised through a focus group discussion. RESULTS: The panel reached consensus on image quality criteria regarding image identification; artefacts; uniformity; symmetry; contrast; radiation dose; sharpness; fibroglandular triangle depiction; nipple-pectoralis distance; depiction of posterior, medial and lateral breast regions in craniocaudal views; and depiction of the pectoralis muscle, inframammary fold and superior breast regions in mediolateral views. However, additional attention was asked to provide clear guidelines on additional, alternative images in screening settings; defining a proper description of good, suboptimal and insufficient compression force; and providing detailed advice on which folds and air projections warrant a retake. CONCLUSION: This study resulted in a checklist for mammogram image quality assessment, along with cut-off values for good, suboptimal, and insufficient quality, with the clinical relevance of each quality criterion highlighted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A standardized image quality assessment tool is offered to improve the consistency of mammographic image quality interpretation in screening programmes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Radiography
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2026.103410
Primary Topic
Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Image quality standards in digital mammography: A consensus statement

L. Vandendaele, Steven Wallaert, Pieter De Visschere, M. Van Gurp et al.
Radiography
Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
article

Image quality standards in digital mammography: A consensus statement

L. Vandendaele, Steven Wallaert, Pieter De Visschere, M. Van Gurp, M.M. Goossens, C. Van Ongeval, L. Cockmartin, K. Van Herck, S. Hendrickx
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of image quality in screening mammograms can suffer from significant inter- and intra-observer variability leading to inconsistent quality assessment. The purpose of this study is to establish a standardized framework for describing image quality, thereby reducing subjectivity and enhancing observer consistency. METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted to compile a preliminary list of 19 image quality criteria. This preliminary list was evaluated by a multidisciplinary panel of 23 experts through a modified Delphi survey. Experts ranked each criterion based on its "importance for image quality" and "agreement with the phrasing." Criteria for which consensus was not initially achieved were subsequently revised through a focus group discussion. RESULTS: The panel reached consensus on image quality criteria regarding image identification; artefacts; uniformity; symmetry; contrast; radiation dose; sharpness; fibroglandular triangle depiction; nipple-pectoralis distance; depiction of posterior, medial and lateral breast regions in craniocaudal views; and depiction of the pectoralis muscle, inframammary fold and superior breast regions in mediolateral views. However, additional attention was asked to provide clear guidelines on additional, alternative images in screening settings; defining a proper description of good, suboptimal and insufficient compression force; and providing detailed advice on which folds and air projections warrant a retake. CONCLUSION: This study resulted in a checklist for mammogram image quality assessment, along with cut-off values for good, suboptimal, and insufficient quality, with the clinical relevance of each quality criterion highlighted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A standardized image quality assessment tool is offered to improve the consistency of mammographic image quality interpretation in screening programmes.

RadiographyVol. 32(4)
Ghent University Hospital (BE), Ghent University (BE), Stichting tegen Kanker (BE), Dutch Expert Centre for Screening (NL), KU Leuven (BE)
Vlaamse Overheid, Universiteit Gent
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.