ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Inter-modality assessment of medial temporal lobe atrophy in a non-demented population: application of a visual rating scale template across radiologists with varying clinical experience.
Article in European radiology, 2022. 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.
- The role of visual rating and automated brain volumetry in early detection and differential diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess inter-modality agreement and accuracy for medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA) ratings across radiologists with varying clinical experience in a non-demented population.
methodsFour raters (two junior radiologists and two senior neuroradiologists) rated MTA on CT and MRI scans using Scheltens' MTA scale. Ratings were compared to a consensus rating by two experienced neuroradiologists for estimation of true positive and negative rates (TPR and TNR) and over- and underestimation of MTA. Inter-modality agreement expressed as Cohen's κ (dichotomized data), Cohen's κ
resultsForty-nine subjects (median age 72 years, 27% abnormal MTA) with cognitive impairment were included. Only junior radiologists achieved adequate agreement expressed as Cohen's κ. All raters achieved adequate agreement expressed as Cohen's κ
conclusionWe conclude that radiologists with varying experience achieve adequate inter-modality agreement and similar accuracy when Scheltens' MTA scale is used to rate MTA on a non-demented population. However, TPR varied between radiologists which could be attributed to rating style differences. KEY POINTS: • Radiologists with varying experience achieve adequate inter-modality agreement with similar accuracy when Scheltens' MTA scale is used to rate MTA on a non-demented population. • Differences in rating styles might affect accuracy, this was most evident for senior neuroradiologists, and only junior radiologists achieved adequate agreement on dichotomized (abnormal/normal) ratings. • The use of an MTA scale template might compensate for varying clinical experience which could make it applicable for clinical use.
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.