ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2024
Systematic training of LI-RADS CT v2018 improves interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for focal liver lesions.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2024. 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.
- Improving hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in the United Kingdom: challenges and solutions.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo retrospectively explored whether systematic training in the use of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 on computed tomography (CT) can improve the interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for focal liver lesions (FLLs) among different radiologists. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 18 visiting radiologists and the liver multiphase CT images of 70 hepatic observations in 63 patients at high risk of HCC were included in this study. The LI-RADS v2018 training procedure included three thematic lectures, with an interval of 1 month. After each seminar, the radiologists had 1 month to adopt the algorithm into their daily work. The interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for FLLs among the radiologists before and after training were compared.
resultsAfter training, the interobserver agreements in classifying the LR categories for all radiologists were significantly increased for most LR categories (P < 0.001), except for LR-1 (P = 0.053). After systematic training, the areas under the curve (AUCs) for LR categorization performance for all participants were significantly increased for most LR categories (P < 0.001), except for LR-1 (P = 0.062).
conclusionSystematic training in the use of the LI-RADS can improve the interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for FLLs among radiologists with different levels of experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38291269What 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.