ArticlePediatric radiology2020
Interpretation of pediatric chest radiographs by non-radiologist clinicians in Botswana using World Health Organization criteria for endpoint pneumonia.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2020. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- X-ray interpretation in emergency department in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Do we need the radiologist?Emergency radiology · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Paediatric Tuberculosis.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- Interpretation of pediatric chest radiographs by non-radiologist clinicians in Botswana.Pediatric radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn low- and middle-income countries, chest radiographs are most frequently interpreted by non-radiologist clinicians.
objectiveWe examined the reliability of chest radiograph interpretations performed by non-radiologist clinicians in Botswana and conducted an educational intervention aimed at improving chest radiograph interpretation accuracy among non-radiologist clinicians. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe recruited non-radiologist clinicians at a referral hospital in Gaborone, Botswana, to interpret de-identified chest radiographs for children with clinical pneumonia. We compared their interpretations with those of two board-certified pediatric radiologists in the United States. We evaluated associations between level of medical training and the accuracy of chest radiograph findings between groups, using logistic regression and kappa statistics. We then developed an in-person training intervention led by a pediatric radiologist. We asked participants to interpret 20 radiographs before and immediately after the intervention, and we compared their responses to those of the facilitating radiologist. For both objectives, our primary outcome was the identification of primary endpoint pneumonia, defined by the World Health Organization as presence of endpoint consolidation or endpoint effusion.
resultsTwenty-two clinicians interpreted chest radiographs in the primary objective; there were no significant associations between level of training and correct identification of endpoint pneumonia; concordance between respondents and radiologists was moderate (κ=0.43). After the training intervention, participants improved agreement with the facilitating radiologist for endpoint pneumonia from fair to moderate (κ=0.34 to κ=0.49).
conclusionNon-radiologist clinicians in Botswana do not consistently identify key chest radiographic findings of pneumonia. A targeted training intervention might improve non-radiologist clinicians' ability to interpret chest radiographs.
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.