Benefits of Independent Double Reading in Digital Mammography: A Theoretical Evaluation of All Possible Pairing Methodologies.
Breast cancer
Digital mammography
Double reading
Observer variation
Radiologists
Journal
Academic radiology
ISSN: 1878-4046
Titre abrégé: Acad Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9440159
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
received:
25
04
2018
revised:
19
06
2018
accepted:
19
06
2018
pubmed:
2
8
2018
medline:
25
4
2020
entrez:
2
8
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To establish the efficacy of pairing readers randomly and evaluate the merits of developing optimal pairing methodologies. Sensitivity, specificity, and proportion correct were computed for three different case sets that were independently read by 16 radiologists. Performance of radiologists as single readers was compared to expected double reading performance. We theoretically evaluated all possible pairing methodologies. Bootstrap resampling methods were used for statistical analyses. Significant improvements in expected performance for double versus single reading (ie, delta performance) were shown for all performance measures and case-sets (p ≤ .003), with overall delta performance across all theoretically possible pairing schemes (n = 10,395) ranging between .05 and .08. Delta performance for the 20 best pairing schemes was significant (p < .001) and ranged between .07 and .10. Delta performance for 20 random pairing schemes was also significant (p ≤ .003) and ranged between .05 and .08. Delta performance for the 20 worst pairing schemes ranged between .03 and .06, reaching significance in delta proportion correct (p ≤ .021) for all three case-sets and in delta specificity for two case-sets (p ≤ .033) but not for a third case-set (p = .131), and not reaching significance in delta sensitivity for any of the three case-sets (.098 ≥ p ≥ .067). Significant benefits accrue from double reading, and while random reader pairing achieves most double reading benefits, a strategic pairing approach may maximize the benefits of double reading.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30064917
pii: S1076-6332(18)30331-3
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.06.017
pmc: PMC7184882
mid: NIHMS1031966
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
717-723Subventions
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB018958
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB026427
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 The Association of University Radiologists. All rights reserved.
Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Aug 2;113(31):8777-82
pubmed: 27432950
Clin Radiol. 1994 Apr;49(4):248-51
pubmed: 8162681
Radiology. 2004 May;231(2):564-70
pubmed: 15044742
BMC Med Imaging. 2012 Jul 24;12:22
pubmed: 22827803
Trials. 2014 Jan 10;15:17
pubmed: 24411004
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 May 23;114(21):E4306-E4315
pubmed: 28490500
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Apr;190(4):854-9
pubmed: 18356428
Acad Radiol. 2006 May;13(5):566-72
pubmed: 16627197
Radiology. 1994 Apr;191(1):241-4
pubmed: 8134580
J Med Screen. 2005;12(2):103-6
pubmed: 15949122
Eur J Cancer. 2008 Apr;44(6):798-807
pubmed: 18353630
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jul;50(10):1799-1807
pubmed: 24746887
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018 Feb 26;19(2):291-301
pubmed: 29479948
JAMA. 2016 May 10;315(18):1956-65
pubmed: 27163985
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 26;11(7):e0159806
pubmed: 27459663