ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Inter- and intra-observer variability of radial-endobronchial ultrasound image interpretation for peripheral pulmonary lesions.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. 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.
- Advanced Bronchoscopic Approaches to Peripheral Pulmonary Lesions: a Narrative Review of Current and Emerging Techniques.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Pulmonary Endoscopy: Current Evidence, Limitations, and Future Directions.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- A predictive model for diagnosing peripheral pulmonary lesions using radial probe endobronchial ultrasound images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Radial probe endobronchial ultrasound (R-EBUS) is often utilized in guided bronchoscopy for the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions. R-EBUS probe positioning has been shown to correlate with diagnostic yield, but overall diagnostic yield with this technology has been inconsistent across the published literature. Currently there is no standardization for R-EBUS image interpretation, which may result in variability in grading concentricity of lesions and subsequently procedure performance. This was a survey-based study evaluating variability among practicing pulmonologists in R-EBUS image interpretation. Methods: R-EBUS images from peripheral bronchoscopy cases were sent to 10 practicing Interventional Pulmonologists at two different time points (baseline and 3 months). Participants were asked to grade the images as concentric, eccentric, or no image. Cohen's Kappa-coefficient was calculated for inter- and intra-observer variability. Results: A total of 100 R-EBUS images were included in the survey. There was 100% participation with complete survey responses from all 10 participants. Overall kappa-statistic for inter-observer variability for Survey 1 and 2 was 0.496 and 0.477 respectively. Overall kappa-statistic for intra-observer variability between the two surveys was 0.803. Conclusions: There is significant variability between pulmonologists when characterizing R-EBUS images. However, there is strong intra-rater agreement from each participant between surveys. A standardized approach and grading system for radial EBUS patterns may improve inter-observer variability in order to optimize our clinical use and research efforts in the field.
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.