SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2015
Radiological interpretation of images displayed on tablet computers: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy and tracing time of cephalometric analyses on a tablet or desktop computer : A prospective study.Head & face medicine · 2024Article
- The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Advances in medical education and practice · 2023Article
- Reliability and accuracy of individual Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score regions using a medical and a smartphone reading system in a telestroke network.Journal of telemedicine and telecare · 2021Article
- Reliability of diagnosing acute ischemic cerebrovascular on magnetic resonance imaging disorders using iPads.Japanese journal of radiology · 2018Article
- Digital dental radiology in Belgium: a nationwide survey.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2018Article
- Tablets for Image Review and Communication in Daily Routine of Orthopedic Surgeons-An Evaluation Study.Journal of digital imaging · 2018Article
- Accuracy of acute burns diagnosis made using smartphones and tablets: a questionnaire-based study among medical experts.BMC emergency medicine · 2017Article
- Image-based teleconsultation using smartphones or tablets: qualitative assessment of medical experts.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2017Article
- What drives attitude towards telemedicine among families of pediatric patients? A survey.BMC pediatrics · 2017Article
- The effect of time in use on the display performance of the iPad.The British journal of radiology · 2016Article
- Remote reading of coronary CTA exams using a tablet computer: utility for stenosis assessment and identification of coronary anomalies.Emergency radiology · 2016Article
- Mobile devices and their prospective future role in emergency radiology.The British journal of radiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo review the published evidence and to determine if radiological diagnostic accuracy is compromised when images are displayed on a tablet computer and thereby inform practice on using tablet computers for radiological interpretation by on-call radiologists.
methodsWe searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for studies on the diagnostic accuracy or diagnostic reliability of images interpreted on tablet computers. Studies were screened for inclusion based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias using Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability Studies or the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Treatment of studies was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
results11 studies met the inclusion criteria. 10 of these studies tested the Apple iPad(®) (Apple, Cupertino, CA). The included studies reported high sensitivity (84-98%), specificity (74-100%) and accuracy rates (98-100%) for radiological diagnosis. There was no statistically significant difference in accuracy between a tablet computer and a digital imaging and communication in medicine-calibrated control display. There was a near complete consensus from authors on the non-inferiority of diagnostic accuracy of images displayed on a tablet computer. All of the included studies were judged to be at risk of bias.
conclusionOur findings suggest that the diagnostic accuracy of radiological interpretation is not compromised by using a tablet computer. This result is only relevant to the Apple iPad and to the modalities of CT, MRI and plain radiography. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The iPad may be appropriate for an on-call radiologist to use for radiological interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.