This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Brealey, S Articles by Scally, A J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Brealey, S Articles by Scally, A J

Bias in plain film reading performance studies

¹ Department of Health Sciences & Clinical Evaluation, University of York, York YO1 5DD
² Division of Radiography, University of Bradford, Bradford BD5 0BB, UK

Radiographers and other healthcare professionals are becoming increasingly involved in radiological reporting, for instance plain radiographs, mammography and ultrasound. Systematic reviews of research evidence can help to assimilate a knowledge base by ordering and evaluating the available evidence on the reporting accuracy of different professional groups. This article reviews the biases that can undermine the results of plain film reading performance studies. These biases are subdivided into three categories. The first category refers to the selection of subjects, including both films and professionals, and covers the validity of generalizing results beyond the study population. The other two categories are concerned with study design and the interpretation both of films and of reports and the effect on study validity. An understanding of these biases is essential when designing such studies and when interpreting the results of existing studies.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				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]

				G. T. Sica Bias in Research Studies Radiology, March 1, 2006; 238(3): 780 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y Balabanova, R Coker, I Fedorin, S Zakharova, S Plavinskij, N Krukov, R Atun, and F Drobniewski Variability in interpretation of chest radiographs among Russian clinicians and implications for screening programmes: observational study BMJ, August 13, 2005; 331(7513): 379 - 382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Brealey, D G King, S Hahn, C Godfrey, M T I Crowe, K Bloor, S Crane, and D Longsworth The costs and effects of introducing selectively trained radiographers to an A&E reporting service: a retrospective controlled before and after study Br. J. Radiol., June 1, 2005; 78(930): 499 - 505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Bossuyt, J. B. Reitsma, D. E. Bruns, C. A. Gatsonis, P. P. Glasziou, L. M. Irwig, D. Moher, D. Rennie, H. C.W. de Vet, and J. G. Lijmer The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration Ann Intern Med, January 7, 2003; 138(1): W1 - W12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Bossuyt, J. B. Reitsma, D. E. Bruns, C. A. Gatsonis, P. P. Glasziou, L. M. Irwig, D. Moher, D. Rennie, H. C.W. de Vet, and J. G. Lijmer The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration Clin. Chem., January 1, 2003; 49(1): 7 - 18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Brealey, D G King, M T I Crowe, I Crawshaw, L Ford, N G Warnock, R A J Mannion, and S Ethell Accident and Emergency and General Practitioner plain radiograph reporting by radiographers and radiologists: a quasi-randomized controlled trial Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2003; 76(901): 57 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				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]