Specialist learning curves and clinical feasibility of introducing a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity

BJR|Open Pub Date : 2024-04-10 DOI:10.1093/bjro/tzae008
Francesca De Luca, Thröstur Finnbogason, Ola Kvist
{"title":"Specialist learning curves and clinical feasibility of introducing a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity","authors":"Francesca De Luca, Thröstur Finnbogason, Ola Kvist","doi":"10.1093/bjro/tzae008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n MRI is an emerging imaging modality to assess skeletal maturity. This study aimed to chart the learning curves of paediatric radiologists when using an unfamiliar MRI grading system of skeletal maturity and to assess the clinical feasibility of implementing said system.\n \n \n \n 958 healthy paediatric volunteers were prospectively included in a dual-facility study. Each subject underwent a conventional MRI scan at 1.5 T. To perform the image reading, the participants were grouped into five subsets (subsets 1 to 5) of equal size (n∼192) in chronological order for scan acquisition. Two paediatric radiologists (R1–2) with different levels of MRI experience, both of whom were previously unfamiliar with the study’s MRI grading system, independently evaluated the subsets to assess skeletal maturity in five different growth plate locations. Congruent cases at blinded reading established the consensus reading. For discrepant cases, the consensus reading was obtained through an unblinded reading by a third paediatric radiologist (R3), also unfamiliar with the MRI grading system. Further, R1 performed a second blinded image reading for all included subjects with a memory wash-out of 180 days. Weighted Cohen’s kappa was used to assess interreader reliability (R1 vs consensus; R2 vs consensus) at non-cumulative and cumulative time points, as well as interreader (R1 vs R2) and intrareader (R1 vs R1) reliability at non-cumulative time points.\n \n \n \n Mean weighted Cohen’s kappa values for each pair of blinded readers compared to consensus reading (interreader reliability, R1–2 vs consensus) were ≥0.85, showing a strong to almost perfect interreader agreement at both non-cumulative and cumulative time points and in all growth plate locations. Weighted Cohen’s kappa values for interreader (R1 vs R2) and intrareader reliability (R1 vs R1) were ≥0.72 at non-cumulative time points, with values ≥ 0.82 at subset 5.\n \n \n \n Paediatric radiologists’ clinical confidence when introduced to a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity was high from the outset of their learning curve, despite the radiologists’ varying levels of work experience with MRI assessment. The MRI grading system for skeletal maturity investigated in this study is a robust clinical method when used by paediatric radiologists and can be used in clinical practice.\n \n \n \n Radiologists with fellowship training in paediatric radiology experienced no learning curve progress when introduced to a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity and achieved desirable agreement from the first time point of the learning curve. The robustness of the investigated MRI grading system was not affected by the earlier different levels of MRI experience among the readers.\n","PeriodicalId":516126,"journal":{"name":"BJR|Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJR|Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjro/tzae008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

MRI is an emerging imaging modality to assess skeletal maturity. This study aimed to chart the learning curves of paediatric radiologists when using an unfamiliar MRI grading system of skeletal maturity and to assess the clinical feasibility of implementing said system. 958 healthy paediatric volunteers were prospectively included in a dual-facility study. Each subject underwent a conventional MRI scan at 1.5 T. To perform the image reading, the participants were grouped into five subsets (subsets 1 to 5) of equal size (n∼192) in chronological order for scan acquisition. Two paediatric radiologists (R1–2) with different levels of MRI experience, both of whom were previously unfamiliar with the study’s MRI grading system, independently evaluated the subsets to assess skeletal maturity in five different growth plate locations. Congruent cases at blinded reading established the consensus reading. For discrepant cases, the consensus reading was obtained through an unblinded reading by a third paediatric radiologist (R3), also unfamiliar with the MRI grading system. Further, R1 performed a second blinded image reading for all included subjects with a memory wash-out of 180 days. Weighted Cohen’s kappa was used to assess interreader reliability (R1 vs consensus; R2 vs consensus) at non-cumulative and cumulative time points, as well as interreader (R1 vs R2) and intrareader (R1 vs R1) reliability at non-cumulative time points. Mean weighted Cohen’s kappa values for each pair of blinded readers compared to consensus reading (interreader reliability, R1–2 vs consensus) were ≥0.85, showing a strong to almost perfect interreader agreement at both non-cumulative and cumulative time points and in all growth plate locations. Weighted Cohen’s kappa values for interreader (R1 vs R2) and intrareader reliability (R1 vs R1) were ≥0.72 at non-cumulative time points, with values ≥ 0.82 at subset 5. Paediatric radiologists’ clinical confidence when introduced to a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity was high from the outset of their learning curve, despite the radiologists’ varying levels of work experience with MRI assessment. The MRI grading system for skeletal maturity investigated in this study is a robust clinical method when used by paediatric radiologists and can be used in clinical practice. Radiologists with fellowship training in paediatric radiology experienced no learning curve progress when introduced to a new MRI grading system for skeletal maturity and achieved desirable agreement from the first time point of the learning curve. The robustness of the investigated MRI grading system was not affected by the earlier different levels of MRI experience among the readers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
引入新的骨骼成熟度磁共振成像分级系统的专家学习曲线和临床可行性
磁共振成像是一种新兴的评估骨骼成熟度的成像模式。本研究旨在绘制儿科放射医师在使用陌生的骨骼成熟度核磁共振成像分级系统时的学习曲线图,并评估实施该系统的临床可行性。 在一项双机构研究中,958 名健康的儿科志愿者参与了前瞻性研究。每位受试者都接受了 1.5 T 的常规磁共振成像扫描。为了进行图像读取,受试者按扫描时间顺序被分成五个人数相等的子组(子组 1 至 5)(n∼192)。两名具有不同磁共振成像经验的儿科放射科医生(R1-2)独立评估子集,评估五个不同生长板位置的骨骼成熟度。在盲读时,一致的病例确定为共识读数。对于不一致的病例,则由同样不熟悉磁共振成像分级系统的第三位儿科放射科医生(R3)进行非盲读,以获得共识读数。此外,R1 对所有纳入的受试者进行了第二次盲法图像判读,并进行了 180 天的记忆冲洗。加权科恩卡帕用于评估非累积和累积时间点的读片者间可靠性(R1 vs 共识;R2 vs 共识),以及非累积时间点的读片者间(R1 vs R2)和读片者内(R1 vs R1)可靠性。 与共识读数(读数间可靠性,R1-2 vs 共识读数)相比,每对盲人读数的平均加权科恩卡帕值均≥0.85,表明在非累积和累积时间点以及所有生长板位置,读数间的一致性很强,几乎达到完美。在非累积时间点,读片者之间(R1 vs R2)和读片者内部(R1 vs R1)的加权科恩卡帕值均≥0.72,在子集 5 中的值≥0.82。 尽管放射科医生在核磁共振成像评估方面的工作经验各不相同,但儿科放射科医生在学习新的骨骼成熟度核磁共振成像分级系统之初就有很高的临床信心。本研究调查的骨骼成熟度核磁共振成像分级系统在儿科放射医师使用时是一种可靠的临床方法,可用于临床实践。 接受过儿科放射学研究培训的放射科医生在学习新的骨骼成熟度核磁共振成像分级系统时没有经历学习曲线的变化,并在学习曲线的第一个时间点就达到了理想的一致性。所研究的磁共振成像分级系统的稳健性并没有受到早期不同磁共振成像经验水平的读者的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“Under the hood”: artificial intelligence in personalized radiotherapy Combined with the semantic features of CT and selected clinical variables, a machine learning model for accurately predicting the prognosis of omicron was established Effect of synthetic CT on dose-derived toxicity predictors for MR-only prostate radiotherapy Celebrating five years of BJR|Open Improving Traumatic Fracture Detection on Radiographs with Artificial Intelligence Support: A Multi-Reader Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1