ArticleBMC rheumatology2024
Identifying enthesitis in the sacroiliac joints in patients with axial spondyloarthritis by readers of varying experience: impact of the learning progress.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate the accuracy of identifying enthesitis along with other inflammatory lesions and structural lesions on the MRI of the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) by readers of varying experience and how training sessions and workshops could help improve the accuracy.
methodsA total of 224 patients with clinical diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis who underwent SIJ MRI examinations were retrospectively included in this study. Three readers with 5 years, 3 years and 1 year of experience in musculoskeletal imaging were invited to review the SIJ MRI images independently, while the imaging reports of a senior radiologist (> 10 years' experience) were used as reference. After the first round of image review, a training session and a workshop on the imaging of SIJ in spondyloarthritis were held and the three readers were asked to review the images in the second round. We calculated the accuracy of identifying inflammatory and structural lesions of the three readers as well as the intra-reader agreement.
resultsEnthesitis could be observed in 52.23% of the axial spondyloarthritis patients, while 81.58% of the patients with enthesitis were accompanied with bone marrow edema. All the three readers showed better accuracy at identifying structural lesions than inflammatory lesions. In the first round of image review, the three readers only correctly identified 15.07%, 2.94% and 0.74% of the enthesitis sites. After the training session and workshop, the accuracy rose to 61.03%, 39.34% and 20.22%. The intra-reader agreement of enthesitis calculated as Cohen's kappa was 0.23, 0.034 and 0.014, respectively.
conclusionReaders with less experience in musculoskeletal imaging showed lower accuracy of identifying inflammatory lesions, notably enthesitis. Training sessions and workshops could help improve the diagnostic accuracy of the junior readers.
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.