Literature DB >> 18796675

Formative evaluation of standardized training for CT colonographic image interpretation by novice readers.

Abraham H Dachman1, Katherine B Kelly, Michael P Zintsmaster, Rich Rana, Shweta Khankari, Joseph D Novak, Arif N Ali, Adnan Qalbani, Joel G Fletcher.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To introduce an educational intervention-specifically, a specialized training course-and perform a formative evaluation of the effect of the intervention on novice reader interpretation of computed tomography (CT) colonographic data.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was institutional review board approved. Ten normal and 50 abnormal cases, those of 60 patients with 93 polyps-61 polyps 6-9 mm in diameter and 32 polyps 10 mm or larger-were selected from a previously published trial. Seven novice readers underwent initial training that consisted of a 1-day course, reading assignments, a self-study computer module (with 61 limited data sets), observation of an expert interpreting three cases, and full interpretation of 10 cases with unblinding after each case. After training, the observers independently interpreted 60 cases by means of primary two-dimensional reading with unblinding after each case. For each case, the reading time and the location and maximal diameter of the polyp(s) were recorded. A t test was used to evaluate the observers' improvements, and empirical receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed.
RESULTS: By-patient sensitivities and specificities were determined for each observer. The lowest by-patient sensitivity at the 6 mm or larger polyp threshold was 86%, with 90% specificity. Four observers had 100% by-patient sensitivity at the 10 mm or larger polyp threshold, with 82%-97% specificity. For polyps 10 mm or larger, mean sensitivity and specificity were 98% and 92%, respectively. For the last 20 cases, the average interpretation time per case was 25 minutes. The range of areas under the ROC curve across observers was low: 0.86-0.95.
CONCLUSION: In the described polyp-enriched cohort, novice CT colonographic data readers achieved high sensitivity and good specificity at formative evaluation of a comprehensive training program. Use of a similar comprehensive training method might reduce interreader variability in interpretation accuracy and be useful for reader certification. (c) RSNA, 2008.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18796675     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2491080059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  12 in total

1.  Computer-based self-training for CT colonography with and without CAD.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Silvia Delsanto; Daniela Sacchetto; Loredana Correale; Massimo Falchini; Andrea Ferraris; Giovanni Gandini; Giulia Grazzini; Franco Iafrate; Gabriella Iussich; Lia Morra; Andrea Laghi; Mario Mascalchi; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  CT colonography: advanced computer-aided detection scheme utilizing MTANNs for detection of "missed" polyps in a multicenter clinical trial.

Authors:  Kenji Suzuki; Don C Rockey; Abraham H Dachman
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  CT colonography with computer-aided detection: recognizing the causes of false-positive reader results.

Authors:  Igor Trilisky; Kristen Wroblewski; Michael W Vannier; John M Horne; Abraham H Dachman
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  Can radiologist training and testing ensure high performance in CT colonography? Lessons From the National CT Colonography Trial.

Authors:  Joel G Fletcher; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Benjamin A Herman; C Daniel Johnson; Alicia Toledano; Abraham H Dachman; Amy K Hara; Jeff L Fidler; Christine O Menias; Kevin J Coakley; Mark Kuo; Karen M Horton; Jugesh Cheema; Revathy Iyer; Bettina Siewert; Judy Yee; Richard Obregon; Peter Zimmerman; Robert Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; Martina Morrin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 5.  CT urography for hematuria.

Authors:  Nigel C Cowan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  CT colonography: computer-assisted detection of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  C Robinson; S Halligan; G Iinuma; W Topping; S Punwani; L Honeyfield; S A Taylor
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Effect of computer-aided detection for CT colonography in a multireader, multicase trial.

Authors:  Abraham H Dachman; Nancy A Obuchowski; Jeffrey W Hoffmeister; J Louis Hinshaw; Michael I Frew; Thomas C Winter; Robert L Van Uitert; Senthil Periaswamy; Ronald M Summers; Bruce J Hillman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-07-27       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Does training and experience influence the accuracy of computed tomography colonography interpretation?

Authors:  Greg Rosenfeld; Yi Tzu Nancy Fu; Brendan Quiney; Hong Qian; Darin Krygier; Jacquie Brown; Patrick Vos; Pari Tiwari; Jennifer Telford; Brian Bressler; Robert Enns
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  CT colonography: effect of computer-aided detection of colonic polyps as a second and concurrent reader for general radiologists with moderate experience in CT colonography.

Authors:  Thomas Mang; Luca Bogoni; Vikram X Anand; Dass Chandra; Andrew J Curtin; Anna S Lev-Toaff; Gerardo Hermosillo; Ralph Noah; Vikas Raykar; Marcos Salganicoff; Robert Shaw; Susan Summerton; Rafel F R Tappouni; Helmut Ringel; Michael Weber; Matthias Wolf; Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Can radiographers be trained to triage CT colonography for extracolonic findings?

Authors:  Thierry N Boellaard; C Yung Nio; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Shandra Bipat; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.