Any value in having a "BIRADS 5" sticky somewhere?

lekker, I notice the same thing... too often people respond to someone with a BIRADs 5 and say that 80% of biopsies are benign. If I catch those situations, I'll usually post and explain that for BIRADs 5, unfortunately approx. 95% are malignant, but there is still a 5% chance that the biopsy will be benign. Still, be prepared for a diagnosis.

There is another problem on the other side of this issue, which is with BIRADs 3. So many women come here with a BIRADs 3 rating on their imaging, scared out of their wits and wondering why they should wait 6 months to see what happens. And so often the response from other posters is that they should have the biopsy now, against the recommendation of their radiologist and/or doctor. What is needed instead is an explanation of what a BIRADs 3 means in terms of risk, and why this can be a reasonable approach in low risk situations.

Perhaps what is needed is a sticky thread that explains the BIRADs ratings. Then we could refer people to this thread or cut and paste the appropriate section into something we are writing. The section on BIRADs on BC.org doesn't meet the criteria for me because it just provides the technical explanation of each rating, with no examples of what sorts of conditions are put into each rating, what the risk levels are associated with each rating, what the follow-up procedure is with each rating, why each rating is appropriate in the right situation, and the things to consider when you get a particular rating or are concerned about your rating (when to push for a biopsy or additional screening or a second opinion, etc..)

Just as we don't want the women on this board to mislead women who have a BIRADs 5 on their imaging, we also shouldn't be inciting fear and driving women with BIRADs 3s to have unnecessary biopsies (which can end up leading to the need for more biopsies down the road).