Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27436353›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2017

How visual search relates to visual diagnostic performance: a narrative systematic review of eye-tracking research in radiology.

A van der Gijp, C J Ravesloot, H Jarodzka, M F van der Schaaf, I C van der Schaaf, J P J van Schaik, Th J Ten Cate

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Effects of Prior Diagnosis on Second Opinions and Pathologist Viewing Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Trial in Breast Pathology.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

A van der GijpRadiology Department, University Medical Center Utrecht, E01.132, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. A.vanderGijp-2@umcutrecht.nl.
C J RaveslootRadiology Department, University Medical Center Utrecht, E01.132, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
H JarodzkaCenter for Learning Science and Technologies, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
M F van der SchaafDepartment of Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
I C van der SchaafRadiology Department, University Medical Center Utrecht, E01.132, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J P J van SchaikRadiology Department, University Medical Center Utrecht, E01.132, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Th J Ten CateCenter for Research and Development of Education, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Eye tracking research has been conducted for decades to gain understanding of visual diagnosis such as in radiology. For educational purposes, it is important to identify visual search patterns that are related to high perceptual performance and to identify effective teaching strategies. This review of eye-tracking literature in the radiology domain aims to identify visual search patterns associated with high perceptual performance. Databases PubMed, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science were searched using 'visual perception' OR 'eye tracking' AND 'radiology' and synonyms. Two authors independently screened search results and included eye tracking studies concerning visual skills in radiology published between January 1, 1994 and July 31, 2015. Two authors independently assessed study quality with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, and extracted study data with respect to design, participant and task characteristics, and variables. A thematic analysis was conducted to extract and arrange study results, and a textual narrative synthesis was applied for data integration and interpretation. The search resulted in 22 relevant full-text articles. Thematic analysis resulted in six themes that informed the relation between visual search and level of expertise: (1) time on task, (2) eye movement characteristics of experts, (3) differences in visual attention, (4) visual search patterns, (5) search patterns in cross sectional stack imaging, and (6) teaching visual search strategies. Expert search was found to be characterized by a global-focal search pattern, which represents an initial global impression, followed by a detailed, focal search-to-find mode. Specific task-related search patterns, like drilling through CT scans and systematic search in chest X-rays, were found to be related to high expert levels. One study investigated teaching of visual search strategies, and did not find a significant effect on perceptual performance. Eye tracking literature in radiology indicates several search patterns are related to high levels of expertise, but teaching novices to search as an expert may not be effective. Experimental research is needed to find out which search strategies can improve image perception in learners.

Indexed as

AttentionClinical CompetenceEducation, MedicalEye MovementsHumansRadiologyVisual PerceptionEye trackingImage interpretationMedical educationRadiologySearch patternsVisual diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID27436353
PMCPMC5498587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.