Combining independent decisions increases diagnostic accuracy of reading lumbosacral radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging

Ralf H.J.M. Kurvers, Annemarie De Zoete, Shelby L. Bachman, Paul R. Algra, Raymond Ostelo

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Diagnosing the causes of low back pain is a challenging task, prone to errors. A novel approach to increase diagnostic accuracy in medical decision making is collective intelligence, which refers to the ability of groups to outperform individual decision makers in solving problems. We investigated whether combining the independent ratings of chiropractors, chiropractic radiologists and medical radiologists can improve diagnostic accuracy when interpreting diagnostic images of the lumbosacral spine. Evaluations were obtained from two previously published studies: Study 1 consisted of 13 raters independently rating 300 lumbosacral radiographs; study 2 consisted of 14 raters independently rating 100 lumbosacral magnetic resonance images. In both studies, raters evaluated the presence of 'abnormalities ', which are indicators of a serious health risk and warrant immediate further examination. We combined independent decisions of raters using a majority rule which takes as final diagnosis the decision of the majority of the group. We compared the performance of the majority rule to the performance of single raters. Our results show that with increasing group size (i.e., increasing the number of independent decisions) both sensitivity and specificity increased in both data-sets, with groups consistently outperforming single raters. These results were found for radiographs and MR image reading alike. Our findings suggest that combining independent ratings can improve the accuracy of lumbosacral diagnostic image reading.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0194128
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2018

Fingerprint

Health risks
Magnetic resonance
magnetic resonance imaging
Reading
Decision making
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging techniques
Chiropractic
Aptitude
Low Back Pain
Intelligence
Spine
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
back (body region)
spine (bones)
group size
Sensitivity and Specificity
pain
decision making
Health

Cite this

@article{379780e5f92448d9920429dcd4be8827,
title = "Combining independent decisions increases diagnostic accuracy of reading lumbosacral radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging",
abstract = "Diagnosing the causes of low back pain is a challenging task, prone to errors. A novel approach to increase diagnostic accuracy in medical decision making is collective intelligence, which refers to the ability of groups to outperform individual decision makers in solving problems. We investigated whether combining the independent ratings of chiropractors, chiropractic radiologists and medical radiologists can improve diagnostic accuracy when interpreting diagnostic images of the lumbosacral spine. Evaluations were obtained from two previously published studies: Study 1 consisted of 13 raters independently rating 300 lumbosacral radiographs; study 2 consisted of 14 raters independently rating 100 lumbosacral magnetic resonance images. In both studies, raters evaluated the presence of 'abnormalities ', which are indicators of a serious health risk and warrant immediate further examination. We combined independent decisions of raters using a majority rule which takes as final diagnosis the decision of the majority of the group. We compared the performance of the majority rule to the performance of single raters. Our results show that with increasing group size (i.e., increasing the number of independent decisions) both sensitivity and specificity increased in both data-sets, with groups consistently outperforming single raters. These results were found for radiographs and MR image reading alike. Our findings suggest that combining independent ratings can improve the accuracy of lumbosacral diagnostic image reading.",
author = "Kurvers, {Ralf H.J.M.} and {De Zoete}, Annemarie and Bachman, {Shelby L.} and Algra, {Paul R.} and Raymond Ostelo",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0194128",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
journal = "PLoS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

Combining independent decisions increases diagnostic accuracy of reading lumbosacral radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging. / Kurvers, Ralf H.J.M.; De Zoete, Annemarie; Bachman, Shelby L.; Algra, Paul R.; Ostelo, Raymond.

In: PLoS ONE, Vol. 13, No. 4, e0194128, 01.04.2018.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Combining independent decisions increases diagnostic accuracy of reading lumbosacral radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging

AU - Kurvers, Ralf H.J.M.

AU - De Zoete, Annemarie

AU - Bachman, Shelby L.

AU - Algra, Paul R.

AU - Ostelo, Raymond

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - Diagnosing the causes of low back pain is a challenging task, prone to errors. A novel approach to increase diagnostic accuracy in medical decision making is collective intelligence, which refers to the ability of groups to outperform individual decision makers in solving problems. We investigated whether combining the independent ratings of chiropractors, chiropractic radiologists and medical radiologists can improve diagnostic accuracy when interpreting diagnostic images of the lumbosacral spine. Evaluations were obtained from two previously published studies: Study 1 consisted of 13 raters independently rating 300 lumbosacral radiographs; study 2 consisted of 14 raters independently rating 100 lumbosacral magnetic resonance images. In both studies, raters evaluated the presence of 'abnormalities ', which are indicators of a serious health risk and warrant immediate further examination. We combined independent decisions of raters using a majority rule which takes as final diagnosis the decision of the majority of the group. We compared the performance of the majority rule to the performance of single raters. Our results show that with increasing group size (i.e., increasing the number of independent decisions) both sensitivity and specificity increased in both data-sets, with groups consistently outperforming single raters. These results were found for radiographs and MR image reading alike. Our findings suggest that combining independent ratings can improve the accuracy of lumbosacral diagnostic image reading.

AB - Diagnosing the causes of low back pain is a challenging task, prone to errors. A novel approach to increase diagnostic accuracy in medical decision making is collective intelligence, which refers to the ability of groups to outperform individual decision makers in solving problems. We investigated whether combining the independent ratings of chiropractors, chiropractic radiologists and medical radiologists can improve diagnostic accuracy when interpreting diagnostic images of the lumbosacral spine. Evaluations were obtained from two previously published studies: Study 1 consisted of 13 raters independently rating 300 lumbosacral radiographs; study 2 consisted of 14 raters independently rating 100 lumbosacral magnetic resonance images. In both studies, raters evaluated the presence of 'abnormalities ', which are indicators of a serious health risk and warrant immediate further examination. We combined independent decisions of raters using a majority rule which takes as final diagnosis the decision of the majority of the group. We compared the performance of the majority rule to the performance of single raters. Our results show that with increasing group size (i.e., increasing the number of independent decisions) both sensitivity and specificity increased in both data-sets, with groups consistently outperforming single raters. These results were found for radiographs and MR image reading alike. Our findings suggest that combining independent ratings can improve the accuracy of lumbosacral diagnostic image reading.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044868723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044868723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0194128

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0194128

M3 - Article

VL - 13

JO - PLoS ONE

JF - PLoS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

M1 - e0194128

ER -