PURPOSE: To assess the effects or four interpretative methods on observers'
mean sensitivity and specificity by using computed tomography (CT) of ovar
ian carcinoma as a model.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT scans in 98 patients with ovarian carcinoma and 4
9 women who were disease free were retrospectively reviewed by four experie
nced blinded radiologists to compare single-observer reading, single-observ
er reading with an anatomic checklist, paired-observer reading (simultaneou
s double reading), and replicated reading (combination of two independent r
eadings). Confidence level scoring was used to identify three possible dise
ase forms in each patient: extranodal tumor, lymphadenopathy, and ascites.
Patient conditions were then categorized as abnormal or normal.
RESULTS: There were no significant improvements in sensitivity or specifici
ty for classification of patient conditions as abnormal or normal when comp
aring single-observer interpretation with single-observer interpretation wi
th a checklist or paired-observer interpretation. Although there was no sig
nificant improvement in the mean sensitivity (93% vs 94%) by using the repl
icated reading method, there was a statistically significant improvement in
mean specificity (85% vs 79%) for the replicated readings compared with si
ngle-observer interpretations (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic aids such as checklists and paired simultaneous read
ings did not lead to an improved mean observer performance for experienced
readers. :However, an increase in the mean specificity occurred with replic
ated readings.