ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2018
Reliability of diagnosing acute ischemic cerebrovascular on magnetic resonance imaging disorders using iPads.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Tablets as an Option for Telemedicine-Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance and Efficiency in Intracranial Arterial Aneurysm Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe use of tablet terminals has been explored in various medical settings; however, caution should be exercised when performing image diagnosis using this technology. The present study examined the characteristics of an iPad Air™ monitor and assessed radiographic image interpretations to verify the reliability of the telediagnosis of acute cerebral infarction based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using a tablet terminal. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe luminance of the iPad Air™ was measured using a UA-10 analyzer, and radiographic image interpretation experiments were performed in 100 patients who underwent MRI within 6 h of symptom onset. Ten physicians viewed the images on the iPad Air™ and a medical monitor, with an interval of 2 months between each interpretation.
resultsWhen the iPad Air™ screen was pure white, the contour lines revealed nonuniform luminance distribution. In the reading experiment, the areas under the curve of the medical monitor and the iPad Air™ were 0.9311 and 0.9431, respectively. No significant difference was observed between the medical monitor and the iPad Air™ (p = 0.113).
conclusionThe results of the observer performance studies for detecting acute ischemic cerebrovascular disorders on an iPad Air™ were found to be similar to those on a medical monitor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30317411What 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.