Computer treason: Intraobserver variabilty of an electocardiographic computer system

American Journal of Cardiology

Volumn 80, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 102-103

  Spodick, David H ^a,b   Bishop, Richard L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b SAINT VINCENT HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; HUMAN; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STANDARD;

EID: 0031195284     PISSN: 00029149     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9149(97)00296-8     Document Type: Article

References (6)

1. 1. Berner ES, Webster GD, Shugerman AA, Jackson JR, Algina J, Baker AL, Ball EV, Cobbs CG, Dennis VW, Frenkel EP, Hudson LD, Mancall EL, Rackley CE, Taunton OD. Performance of four computer-based diagnostic systems. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1792-1796.
2. 2. Jakobsson A, Ohlin P, Pahlm O. Does a computer-based ECG recorded interpret electrocardiograms more efficiently than physicians? Clin Physiol 1985;5:417-423.
3. 3. Macfarlane PW. A brief history of computer assisted electrocardiography. Method Inform Med 1990;29:272-281.
4. 4. Edenbrandt L, Devine B, Macfarlane PW. Neutral networks for classification of electrocardiographic ST-T segments. J Electrocardiol 1992;25:167-173.
5. 5. Kassirer, JK. A report card on computer-assisted diagnosis - the grade: C. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1824-1825.
6. 6. Hurst JW, Treasure CB, Sathavorn CS. Computer errors in electrocardiography. Clin Cardiol 1996;19:580-586.