ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2024
Impact of diffusion-weighted imaging on agreement between radiologists and non-radiologist in musculoskeletal tumor imaging using magnetic resonance.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is widely used in neuroradiology or abdominal imaging but not yet implemented in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal tumors. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate how including diffusion imaging in the MRI protocol for patients with musculoskeletal tumors affects the agreement between radiologists and non-radiologist. Methods: Thirty-nine patients with musculoskeletal tumors (Ewing sarcoma, osteosarcoma, and benign tumors) consulted at our institution were included. Three raters with different experience levels evaluated examinations blinded to all clinical data. The final diagnosis was determined by consensus. MRI examinations were split into 1) conventional sequences and 2) conventional sequences combined with DWI. We evaluated the presence or absence of diffusion restriction, solid nature, necrosis, deep localization, and diameter >4 cm as known radiological markers of malignancy. Agreement between raters was evaluated using Gwet's AC1 coefficients and interpreted according to Landis and Koch. Results: The lowest agreement was for diffusion restriction in both groups of raters. Agreement among all raters ranged from 0.51 to 0.945, indicating moderate to almost perfect agreement, and 0.772-0.965 among only radiologists indicating substantial to almost perfect agreement. Conclusion: The agreement in evaluating diffusion-weighted MRI sequences was lower than that for conventional MRI sequences, both among radiologists and non-radiologist and among radiologists alone. This indicates that assessing diffusion imaging is more challenging, and experience may impact the agreement.
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.