Suppr超能文献

在矽肺评估中传统胸部X线摄影与AMBER之间观察者间再现性的比较。

Comparison of inter-observer reproducibility between conventional chest radiography and AMBER in the evaluation of silicosis.

作者信息

Gambini G, Gandini G, Agostini N, Albertinazzi S, Boccardi A, Brambilla M, Vietti F

机构信息

Department of Occupational Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliera Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy.

出版信息

Med Lav. 1996 Jul-Aug;87(4):323-9.

PMID:8956544
Abstract

The aims of this study were to test inter-observer and intraobserver agreement in the diagnosis of silicosis using conventional chest radiography and AMBER. One hundred and fifteen patients underwent chest x-rays and AMBER for the diagnosis of silicosis. Five readers blindly and independently evaluated the radiograms with standard ILO/UC classification scales. Reproducibility was assessed using ANOVA repeated measurements methods. AMBER showed a better technical quality of radiograms than conventional chest x-rays; interobserver reproducibility was high and similar (R = 0.75); intraobserver agreement between chest x-rays and AMBER was high ranging from 0.62 to 0.86 for the 5 readers. Notwithstanding the absence of standards for profusion classification, the interobserver reproducibility with AMBER was similar to that obtained with chest x-rays. Moreover, the intraobserver agreement in profusion scoring between AMBER and chest radiography was high, suggesting that AMBER and chest radiography provided similar information in the evaluation of silicosis.

摘要

本研究的目的是使用传统胸部X线摄影和AMBER检测矽肺诊断中观察者间和观察者内的一致性。115名患者接受了胸部X线检查和AMBER检查以诊断矽肺。五名阅片者使用标准的国际劳工组织/UC分类量表对胸片进行了盲法独立评估。使用方差分析重复测量方法评估再现性。与传统胸部X线摄影相比,AMBER显示出更好的胸片技术质量;观察者间的再现性较高且相似(R = 0.75);对于5名阅片者,胸部X线摄影和AMBER之间的观察者内一致性较高,范围从0.62至0.86。尽管缺乏肺野分类标准,但AMBER的观察者间再现性与胸部X线摄影相似。此外,AMBER和胸部X线摄影在肺野评分方面的观察者内一致性较高,这表明AMBER和胸部X线摄影在矽肺评估中提供了相似的信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验