ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Inter-Group Agreement in Chest Radiographic Quality Assessment: Comparing Final-Year Students and Experienced Radiographers Across Three Quality Assessment Domains During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2026. 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
introductionReproducible image quality assessment (QA) by radiographers is vital to minimise inter-observer variation and reduce unnecessary repeat exposures. This study compared the consistency of chest X-ray (CXR) image quality assessments between final-year student radiographers and experienced radiographers across three distinct QA domains (positioning, sharpness and visibility) to observe skill consistency across different pathology categories.
methodsThis retrospective observational study analysed 70 de-identified CXRs acquired between May and September 2021 from patients presenting with symptoms of pulmonary infection during the COVID-19 pandemic and retrieved from the PACS archive of a tertiary teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia. Two experienced radiologists independently reviewed each case and discussed their interpretations to reach a consensus classification based on the available clinical information.
resultsNo significant differences were found between groups in any domain across the different pathology categories (p > 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis showed minimal mean variability, with students rating marginally lower and narrow 95% limits of agreement across all domains. Overall ICC values indicated good-to-excellent reproducibility (ICC = 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.94). These single-institution findings should be interpreted within the dataset's context.
conclusionFinal-year students and experienced radiographers applied QA criteria consistently, demonstrating robust skills across different pathology categories. The small negative bias observed may reflect a more cautious interpretive approach rather than meaningful disagreement. These findings indicate that final-year radiography students demonstrate agreement with experienced radiographers in the application of structured image-quality criteria under controlled assessment conditions.
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.