The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 70, Issue 839 1085-1098, Copyright © 1997 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Radiology's Achilles' heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Rontgen image

PJ Robinson
Department of Clinical Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.

The performance of the human eye and brain has failed to keep pace with the enormous technical progress in the first full century of radiology. Errors and variations in interpretation now represent the weakest aspect of clinical imaging. Those interpretations which differ from the consensus view of a panel of "experts" may be regarded as errors; where experts fail to achieve consensus, differing reports are regarded as "observer variation". Errors arise from poor technique, failures of perception, lack of knowledge and misjudgments. Observer variation is substantial and should be taken into account when different diagnostic methods are compared; in many cases the difference between observers outweighs the difference between techniques. Strategies for reducing error include attention to viewing conditions, training of the observers, availability of previous films and relevant clinical data, dual or multiple reporting, standardization of terminology and report format, and assistance from computers. Digital acquisition and display will probably not affect observer variation but the performance of radiologists, as measured by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, may be improved by computer-directed search for specific image features. Other current developments show that where image features can be comprehensively described, computer analysis can replace the perception function of the observer, whilst the function of interpretation can in some cases be performed better by artificial neural networks. However, computer-assisted diagnosis is still in its infancy and complete replacement of the human observer is as yet a remote possibility.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. G. Filippi, B. Schneider, H. N. Burbank, G. F. Alsofrom, G. Linnell, and B. Ratkovits Discrepancy Rates of Radiology Resident Interpretations of On-Call Neuroradiology MR Imaging Studies Radiology, December 1, 2008; 249(3): 972 - 979. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. D. Johnson, J. G. Fletcher, R. L. MacCarty, J. N. Mandrekar, W. S. Harmsen, P. J. Limburg, and L. A. Wilson Effect of Slice Thickness and Primary 2D Versus 3D Virtual Dissection on Colorectal Lesion Detection at CT Colonography in 452 Asymptomatic Adults Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2007; 189(3): 672 - 680. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Brealey and M Westwood Are you reading what we are reading? The effect of who interprets medical images on estimates of diagnostic test accuracy in systematic reviews Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2007; 80(956): 674 - 677. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S D Brealey, A J Scally, S Hahn, and C Godfrey Evidence of reference standard related bias in studies of plain radiograph reading performance: a meta-regression Br. J. Radiol., June 1, 2007; 80(954): 406 - 413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Berlin Accuracy of Diagnostic Procedures: Has It Improved Over the Past Five Decades? Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): 1173 - 1178. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C.R. Lamb, D.U. Pfeiffer, and P. Mantis Errors in Radiographic Interpretation Made by Veterinary Students J Vet Med Educ, January 1, 2007; 34(2): 157 - 159. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Bernardi, R. Padovani, W. Desmet, A. Peterzol, J. D. Giannuleas, E. Neofotistou, A. Manginas, Z. Olivari, J. Cosgrave, F. Alfonso, et al. A Study to validate the method based on DIMOND quality criteria for cardiac angiographic images Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 263 - 268. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Tingberg, F. Eriksson, J. Medin, J. Besjakov, M. Bath, M. Hakansson, M. Sandborg, A. Almen, B. Lanhede, G. Alm-Carlsson, et al. Inter-observer variation in masked and unmasked images for quality evaluation of clinical radiographs Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 62 - 68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. N. Buchanan, S. Halligan, S. Taylor, A. Williams, R. Cohen, and C. Bartram MRI of Fistula In Ano: Inter- and Intraobserver Agreement and Effects of Directed Education Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2004; 183(1): 135 - 140. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Ward, M. B. Sheridan, J. A. Guthrie, M. H. Davies, C. E. Millson, J. P. A. Lodge, S. G. Pollard, K. R. Prasad, G. J. Toogood, and P. J. Robinson Bile Duct Strictures after Hepatobiliary Surgery: Assessment with MR Cholangiography Radiology, April 1, 2004; 231(1): 101 - 108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. P. Hofer and R. A. Hayward Are Bad Outcomes from Questionable Clinical Decisions Preventable Medical Errors? A Case of Cascade Iatrogenesis Ann Intern Med, September 3, 2002; 137(5_Part_1): 327 - 333. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. S. Yoon, A. H. Haims, J. A. Brink, R. Rabinovici, and H. P. Forman Evaluation of an Emergency Radiology Quality Assurance Program at a Level I Trauma Center: Abdominal and Pelvic CT Studies Radiology, July 1, 2002; 224(1): 42 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				S Brealey, A J Scally, and N B Thomas Methodological standards in radiographer plain film reading performance studies Br. J. Radiol., February 1, 2002; 75(890): 107 - 113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. V Nguyen, K. M Hillman, M. D Buist, S Chakraverty, J Wright, R. Plowman, J. A Roberts, N. Graves, M. A S Griffin, B. Cookson, et al. Adverse events in British hospitals BMJ, June 9, 2001; 322(7299): 1425 - 1425. [Full Text]

				S Brealey and A J Scally Bias in plain film reading performance studies Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2001; 74(880): 307 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Lucaya, J. Piqueras, P. Garcia-Pena, G. Enriquez, M. Garcia-Macias, and J. Sotil Low-Dose High-Resolution CT of the Chest in Children and Young Adults: Dose, Cooperation, Artifact Incidence, and Image Quality Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2000; 175(4): 985 - 992. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Bartram, S. Halligan, J. Stoker, E. Rociu, and J. S. Laméris Endoanal MR Is Really Complementary to Endoanal US Dr Stoker and colleagues respond: Radiology, September 1, 2000; 216(3): 918 - 920. [Full Text]

				R Brennecke, U Burgel, R Simon, G Rippin, H.P Fritsch, T Becker, and S.E Nissen American College of Cardiology/ European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase III. Measurement of image quality differences at varying levels of data compression Eur. Heart J., April 2, 2000; 21(8): 687 - 696. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R.u. Brennecke, U. Burgel, R.u. Simon, G. Rippin, H. P. Fritsch, T. Becker, and S. E. Nissen American College of Cardiology/ European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase III: Measurement of image quality differences at varying levels of data compression J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 1, 2000; 35(5): 1388 - 1397. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. W. Rathbun, G. E. Raskob, and T. L. Whitsett Sensitivity and Specificity of Helical Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review Ann Intern Med, February 1, 2000; 132(3): 227 - 232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. D. Tourassi Journey toward Computer-aided Diagnosis: Role of Image Texture Analysis Radiology, November 1, 1999; 213(2): 317 - 320. [Full Text]

				B. D. Fletcher, A. S. Glicksman, and P. Gieser Interobserver Variability in the Detection of Cervical-Thoracic Hodgkin's Disease by Computed Tomography J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 1999; 17(7): 2153 - 2153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. B. Gunderman and J. M. Nyce The Tyranny of Accuracy in Radiologic Education Radiology, February 1, 2002; 222(2): 297 - 300. [Full Text] [PDF]