Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38684320›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2024

Interrater Agreement of BT-RADS for Evaluation of Follow-up MRI in Patients with Treated Primary Brain Tumor.

Michael Essien, Maxwell E Cooper, Ashwani Gore, Taejin L Min, Benjamin B Risk, Gelareh Sadigh, Ranliang Hu, Michael J Hoch, Brent D Weinberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Michael EssienFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.).ORCID 0000-0001-7468-9443
Maxwell E CooperFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.).ORCID 0000-0003-3521-751X
Ashwani GoreFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.).ORCID 0000-0002-4315-8372
Taejin L MinFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.).ORCID 0000-0002-7105-7886
Benjamin B RiskRollins School of Public Health (B.B.R.), Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID 0000-0003-1090-0777
Gelareh SadighRollins School of Public Health (B.B.R.), Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID 0000-0003-3233-1878
Ranliang HuFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.).ORCID 0000-0001-7767-1652
Michael J HochDepartment of Radiological Sciences (G.S.), University of California Irvine, Orange, California.ORCID 0000-0002-3435-4662
Brent D WeinbergFrom the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (M.E., M.E.C., A.G., T.L.M., R.H., B.D.W.), Brent.d.weinberg@emory.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7992-1747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeThe Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System (BT-RADS) is a structured radiology reporting algorithm that was introduced to provide uniformity in posttreatment primary brain tumor follow-up and reporting, but its interrater reliability (IRR) assessment has not been widely studied. Our goal is to evaluate the IRR among neuroradiologists and radiology residents in the use of BT-RADS. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study reviewed 103 consecutive MR studies in 98 adult patients previously diagnosed with and treated for primary brain tumor (January 2019 to February 2019). Six readers with varied experience (4 neuroradiologists and 2 radiology residents) independently evaluated each case and assigned a BT-RADS score. Readers were blinded to the original score reports and the reports from other readers. Cases in which at least 1 neuroradiologist scored differently were subjected to consensus scoring. After the study, a post hoc reference score was also assigned by 2 readers by using future imaging and clinical information previously unavailable to readers. The interrater reliabilities were assessed by using the Gwet AC2 index with ordinal weights and percent agreement.

resultsOf the 98 patients evaluated (median age, 53 years; interquartile range, 41-66 years), 53% were men. The most common tumor type was astrocytoma (77%) of which 56% were grade 4 glioblastoma. Gwet index for interrater reliability among all 6 readers was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.78-0.87). The Gwet index for the neuroradiologists' group (0.84 [95% CI: 0.79-0.89]) was not statistically different from that for the residents' group (0.79 [95% CI: 0.72-0.86]) (χ

conclusionsA very good interrater agreement was found when tumor reports were interpreted by independent blinded readers by using BT-RADS criteria. Further study is needed to determine if this high overall agreement can translate into greater consistency in clinical care.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingObserver VariationAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiology Information SystemsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID38684320
PMCPMC11392352

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.