Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35195444›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2022

Interobserver variation in the interpretation of magnetic resonance enterography in Crohn's disease.

Gauraang Bhatnagar, Sue Mallett, Laura Quinn, Richard Beable, Helen Bungay, Margaret Betts, Rebecca Greenhalgh, Arun Gupta, Anthony Higginson, Rachel Hyland and 13 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

23 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Gauraang BhatnagarCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6607-1117
Sue MallettCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.
Laura QuinnInstitute of Applied Health Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Richard BeableDepartment of Radiology, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Helen BungayDepartment of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK.
Margaret BettsDepartment of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK.
Rebecca GreenhalghDepartment of Radiology, St George's University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Arun GuptaIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
Anthony HigginsonDepartment of Radiology, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Rachel HylandDepartment of Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Rajapandian IlangovanIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
Hannah LambieDepartment of Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Evgenia MaintaIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
Uday PatelIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
James PilcherDepartment of Radiology, St George's University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Andrew PlumbCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.
François PortéIntestinal Imaging Centre, St Mark's Hospital, LNWUH NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
Harbir SidhuCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew SlaterDepartment of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK.
Damian TolanDepartment of Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Ian ZealleyDepartment of Radiology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK.
Steve HalliganCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.
Stuart TaylorCentre for Medical Imaging, Charles Bell House, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBSt Mark's Hospital · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBPortsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust · GBSt George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBNIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBNinewells Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate interobserver variability for diagnosis of disease presence and extent of small bowel and colonic Crohn's disease using MR enterography (MRE).

methodsData from the first 73 consecutive patients (mean age 32, 33F, 28 new diagnosis, 45 suspected relapse) recruited to a multicentre, prospective diagnostic accuracy trial evaluating MRE for small bowel Crohn's disease were each read independently by three (from a pool of 20) radiologists. Radiologists documented presence and segmental location of small bowel Crohn's disease and recorded morphological mural/extramural parameters for involved segments. Per patient percentage agreement for disease presence and extent were calculated against an outcome-based construct reference standard (averaged between pairs of readers). Prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted κ (PABAK) was calculated.

resultsAgreement for small bowel disease presence for new diagnosis/relapsed patients was 68%(κ = 0.36)/ 78% (κ = 0.56) and 43%(κ = 0.14)/ 53% for disease extent (κ = 0.07), respectively. For disease presence, all three radiologists agreed correctly with the reference standard in 41/59 (69%) of patients with small bowel involvement, and in 8/14 (57%) cases of without small bowel disease. Agreement was highest for multisegment disease, greater than 5 cm in length, with mural thickness>6 mm, and increased mural T2 signal. Agreement for colonic disease presence was 61% (κ = 0.21 fair agreement) for new diagnosis/ 60% (κ = 0.20, slight agreement) for relapsed patients.

conclusionThere is a reasonable agreement between radiologists for small bowel disease presence using MRE for newly diagnosed Crohn's disease, and patients with suspected relapse, respectively. Agreement is lower for disease extent. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: There is reasonable agreement between radiologists for small bowel disease presence using MRE for newly diagnosed (68%) Crohn's disease, and patients with suspected relapse (78%). Agreement is lower for disease extent (43% new diagnosis and 53% suspected relapse).

Indexed as

Crohn DiseaseAdultClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMaleMulticenter Studies as TopicObserver VariationProspective StudiesRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID35195444
PMCPMC12187211
OpenAlexW4213065566

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.