Prevalence of abnormal cases in an image bank affects the learning of radiograph interpretation

Medical Education

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 289-298

  Pusic, Martin V ^a,b   Andrews, John S ^c   Kessler, David O ^a,b   Teng, David C ^a,d   Pecaric, Martin R ^e   Ruzal Shapiro, Carrie ^a   Boutis, Kathy ^f  

^a Howard Hughes Medical Institute   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^d Good Samaritan Hospital Medical Center   (United States)

^e Contrail Consulting Services ^*  (Canada)

^f HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANKLE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL STUDENT; METHODOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TEACHING;

ANKLE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, UNDERGRADUATE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STUDENTS, MEDICAL; TEACHING;

EID: 84857024839     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04165.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Frank MS, Dreyer K. Empowering radiologic education on the Internet: a new virtual website technology for hosting interactive educational content on the World Wide Web. J Digit Imaging 2001;2 (Suppl 1): 113-6.
2. Pinto A, Selvaggi S, Sicignano G, Vollono E, Iervolino L, Amato F, Molinari A, Grassi R. E-learning tools for education: regulatory aspects, current applications in radiology and future prospects. Radiol Med 2008;113 (1):144-57.
3. AuntMinnie.com. 2007. [Accessed 3 November 2011.]
4. e-Lera.net. 2008. [Accessed 3 November 2011.]
5. MyPACS.net. 2008. [Accessed 3 November 2011.]
6. Scarsbrook AF, Graham RN, Perriss RW. The scope of educational resources for radiologists on the Internet. Clin Radiol 2005;60:524-30.
7. Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimise them. Acad Med 2003;78 (8):775-80.
8. Pusic M, Pecaric M, Boutis K. The value of including normal X-rays in an online tutorial that emphasises deliberate practice. Association of American Medical Colleges RIME Conference, 9 November 2009, Boston, MA.
9. Boutis K, Komar L, Jaramillo D, Alman B, Snyder B, Mandl KD, Schuh S. Sensitivity of a clinical examination to predict the need for radiography in children with ankle injuries: a prospective study. Lancet 2001;358:2118-21.
10. Egglin TK, Feinstein AR. Context bias. A problem in diagnostic radiology. JAMA 1996;276 (21):1752-5.
11. Boutis K, Pecaric M, Pusic M. Using signal detection theory to model changes in serial learning of radiological image interpretation. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2010;15:647-58.
12. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Health Sciences, 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2007;49-67.
13. McNicol D. A Primer of Signal Detection Theory. New York, NY: Routledge 2004;1-11.
14. Wickens TD. Elementary Signal Detection Theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press 2002;3-31.
15. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1988;384.
16. Pusic M, Pecaric M, Boutis K. How much practice is enough? Using learning curves to assess the deliberate practice of radiograph interpretation. Acad Med 2011;86 (6):731-6.
17. Thurstone LL. The learning curve equation. Psychol Rev 1919;34:278-86.
18. Green DM, Swets JA. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons 1967;332-3.
19. Wolfe JM, Horowitz TS, Van Wert MJ, Kenner NM, Place SS, Kibbi N. Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 2007;136 (4):623-38.
20. Gur D, Rockette HE, Armfield DR etal. Prevalence effect in a laboratory environment. Radiology 2003;228 (1):10-4.
21. Obuchowski NA. One less bias to worry about. Radiology 2004;232 (1):302.
22. Reed WM, Ryan JT, McEntee MF, Evanoff MG, Brennan PC. The effect of abnormality-prevalence expectation on expert observer performance and visual search. Radiology 2011;258 (3):938-43.
23. Mower WR. Evaluating bias and variability in diagnostic test reports. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33 (1):85-91.
24. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2004;140 (3):189-202.