Hessel S J, Herman P G, Swensson R G
Radiology. 1978 Jun;127(3):589-94. doi: 10.1148/127.3.589.
The accuracy and cost of four methods of duplicate reading were evaluated. Eight radiologists interpreted 100 random chest radiographs. Using a third independent interpretation to resolve disagreements between pairs of readers ("Pseudoarbitration") was the most effective method overall, reducing errors 37%, increasing correct interpretations 18%, and adding 19% to the cost of an error-free interpretation. Resolving disagreements in facor of positive diagnoses was the best method for reducing omissions, but it almost doubled false-positive diagnoses. The choice between single and multiple interpretations must be evaluated in each clinical setting and should consider expected improvements in accuracy, implications for patient care, and additional costs.
对四种重复阅片方法的准确性和成本进行了评估。八位放射科医生解读了100份随机抽取的胸部X光片。总体而言，使用第三种独立解读来解决成对阅片者之间的分歧（“伪仲裁”）是最有效的方法，可减少37%的错误，将正确解读提高18%，并使无错误解读的成本增加19%。支持阳性诊断来解决分歧是减少漏诊的最佳方法，但它几乎使假阳性诊断增加了一倍。在每种临床情况下，都必须评估单次解读和多次解读之间的选择，并且应该考虑准确性的预期提高、对患者护理的影响以及额外成本。
