OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of recognition of a previously encountered radiograph on consistency of response in localized pulmonary nodules. METHODS: 13 radiologists interpreted 40 radiographs each to locate pulmonary nodules. A few days later, they again interpreted 40 radiographs. Half of the images in the second set were new. We asked the radiologists whether each image had been in the first set. We used Fisher's exact test and Kruskal-Wallis test to evaluate the correlation between recognition of an image and consistency in its interpretation. We evaluated the data using all possible recognition levels-definitely, probably or possibly included vs definitely, probably or possibly not included by collapsing the recognition levels into two and by eliminating the "possibly included" and "possibly not included" scores. RESULTS: With all but one of six methods of looking at the data, there was no significant correlation between consistency in interpretation and recognition of the image. When the possibly included and possibly not included scores were eliminated, there was a borderline statistical significance (p = 0.04) with slightly greater consistency in interpretation of recognized than that of non-recognized images. CONCLUSION: We found no convincing evidence that radiologists' recognition of images in an observer performance study affects their interpretation on a second encounter. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Conscious recognition of chest radiographs did not result in a greater degree of consistency in the tested interpretation than that in the interpretation of images that were not recognized.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of recognition of a previously encountered radiograph on consistency of response in localized pulmonary nodules. METHODS: 13 radiologists interpreted 40 radiographs each to locate pulmonary nodules. A few days later, they again interpreted 40 radiographs. Half of the images in the second set were new. We asked the radiologists whether each image had been in the first set. We used Fisher's exact test and Kruskal-Wallis test to evaluate the correlation between recognition of an image and consistency in its interpretation. We evaluated the data using all possible recognition levels-definitely, probably or possibly included vs definitely, probably or possibly not included by collapsing the recognition levels into two and by eliminating the "possibly included" and "possibly not included" scores. RESULTS: With all but one of six methods of looking at the data, there was no significant correlation between consistency in interpretation and recognition of the image. When the possibly included and possibly not included scores were eliminated, there was a borderline statistical significance (p = 0.04) with slightly greater consistency in interpretation of recognized than that of non-recognized images. CONCLUSION: We found no convincing evidence that radiologists' recognition of images in an observer performance study affects their interpretation on a second encounter. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Conscious recognition of chest radiographs did not result in a greater degree of consistency in the tested interpretation than that in the interpretation of images that were not recognized.
Authors: John T Ryan; Tamara Miner Haygood; José-Miguel Yamal; Michael Evanoff; Paul O'Sullivan; Mark McEntee; Patrick C Brennan Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Tamara Miner Haygood; Mary Ashley Qing Liu; Eva M Galvan; Roland Bassett; Catherine Devine; Elizabeth Lano; Chitra Viswanathan; Edith M Marom Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Lara A Hardesty; Marie A Ganott; Christiane M Hakim; Cathy S Cohen; Ronald J Clearfield; David Gur Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Carl R Fuhrman; Cynthia A Britton; Thomas Bender; Jules H Sumkin; Manuel L Brown; J Michael Holbert; Thomas S Chang; Howard E Rockette; David Gur Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Karla K Evans; Michael A Cohen; Rosemary Tambouret; Todd Horowitz; Erica Kreindel; Jeremy M Wolfe Journal: Atten Percept Psychophys Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.199