ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2018
Media messaging in diagnosis of acute CXR pathology: an interobserver study among residents.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mobile applications in radiology: own study based on polish data.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Diagnostic accuracy and reliability of smartphone captured radiologic images communicated via WhatsApp®.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2022Article
- Your mileage may vary: impact of data input method for a deep learning bone age app's predictions.Skeletal radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of the study were to determine whether diagnostic accuracy and reliability by on-call teams is affected by communicating chest radiograph (CXR) images via instant messaging on smartphones in comparison to viewing on a workstation. 12 residents viewed 100 CXR images each with a 24% positive rate for significant or acute findings sent to their phones via a popular instant messaging application and reported their findings if any. After an interval of 42 days they viewed the original DICOM images on personal computers and again reported their findings. There were no statistically significant differences in accuracy, agreement, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value or negative predictive value between desktop workstation viewed images and images sent via the mobile application. Media messaging is a useful adjunct for quick second opinions on radiological images, without significant decay in diagnostic accuracy. If technical, ethical and legal issues are addressed, it could be incorporated into practice as a useful adjunct.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29705886What 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.