Department of Radiology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, UK, EH16 4SA,
Insights Imaging. 2013 Oct;4(5):555-62. doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0274-4. Epub 2013 Aug 4.
Medical smartphone applications are increasingly popular amongst doctors. However, the quality of their content is variable. We assessed contemporary radiology-related smartphone applications, focussing on the level of advertised medical involvement in application development.
Six major application stores were searched between 18-30 June 2012 using the terms radiology, radiation, x-ray(s), computed tomography/CT, magnetic resonance imaging/MRI, ultrasound, nuclear medicine, fluoroscopy and mammography/mammogram. Application ratings, cost and medical input in development were recorded.
321 applications were identified. One hundred fifty-eight were "teaching" and 96 "reference". Three of the 29 DICOM viewing applications had FDA approval for primary diagnosis, while 62 % stated they should not be used for primary diagnosis; 24 % of applications stated named medical professional involvement, 12 % had unnamed medical involvement and 4 % acknowledged guidelines or papers; 42 % did not disclose authorship.
A large variety of radiology-related smartphone applications are available with many potential benefits. Advertised medical involvement in application design is variable, making assessment of their accuracy difficult prior to purchase. Additional measures are required to ensure the accuracy of such applications. The limitations of image interpretation using smartphones are a major drawback of DICOM viewing applications. Further research into the accuracy of primary diagnosis using such applications is needed.
• A large variety of radiology smartphone applications are available with many potential benefits • Variable medical involvement in application design limits assessment of accuracy before purchase • Limitations of image interpretation using smartphones are a drawback of DICOM viewing applications • Further work on the accuracy of primary diagnosis using these DICOM viewing applications is needed.
医学智能手机应用在医生中越来越受欢迎。然而，其内容质量参差不齐。我们评估了当代与放射学相关的智能手机应用，重点关注应用开发中广告宣传的医疗参与程度。
2012 年 6 月 18 日至 30 日期间，我们在六个主要的应用商店中使用“放射学、辐射、X 射线、计算机断层扫描/CT、磁共振成像/MRI、超声、核医学、荧光透视和乳房 X 线照相术/乳房 X 线照片”等术语进行搜索。记录应用程序评级、成本和开发过程中的医疗投入。
共确定了 321 个应用程序。其中 158 个是“教学”应用，96 个是“参考”应用。29 个 DICOM 查看应用程序中有 3 个获得了 FDA 批准用于初步诊断，而 62%的应用程序表示不应将其用于初步诊断；24%的应用程序表示有指定的医疗专业人员参与，12%的应用程序表示有未指定的医疗参与，4%的应用程序承认使用了指南或论文；42%的应用程序未披露作者身份。
有大量与放射学相关的智能手机应用程序可供选择，具有许多潜在的好处。广告宣传的医疗参与度在应用程序设计中存在差异，在购买前很难评估其准确性。需要采取额外的措施来确保此类应用程序的准确性。使用智能手机进行图像解释的局限性是 DICOM 查看应用程序的主要缺点。需要进一步研究使用这些应用程序进行初步诊断的准确性。
有大量与放射学相关的智能手机应用程序可供选择，具有许多潜在的好处。
广告宣传的医疗参与度在应用程序设计中存在差异，在购买前很难评估其准确性。
使用智能手机进行图像解释的局限性是 DICOM 查看应用程序的主要缺点。
需要进一步研究使用这些应用程序进行初步诊断的准确性。
