Confidence of expert ultrasound operators in making a diagnosis of adnexal tumor: effect on diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement

Abstract

Objective To assess the degree of confidence with which expert ultrasound operators make a diagnosis of benign, borderline and invasive malignant ovarian tumors and its effect on diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement. Method

Inter‐ and intraobserver variability in three‐dimensional ultrasound assessment of the endometrial–myometrial junction and factors affecting its visualization

“…This indicates that assessment of the EMJ on 3D scan is reproducible enough to be used in clinical practice. A criticism could be that the classification system was entirely arbitrary, however a similar approach has been used in the past when assessing the reproducibility of ultrasound diagnosis based on subjective evaluation7. Furthermore, it must be remembered that these results apply only to women with normal uteri.…”

Intra‐ and interobserver variability of 2D and 3D transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of benign versus malignant adnexal masses

“…Guerriero et al demonstrated that 2D US was reproducible among experienced examiners in diagnosing ovarian cancer5 and in the specific diagnosis of some benign ovarian cysts 10. Similar results have been recently reported by Yazbek et al6 This latter study also emphasized that the level of confidence for providing a diagnosis affects agreement among observers. All these studies used static 2D images to evaluate intra‐ and interobserver agreement 5, 6, 10, 14…”

“…One is that it relies on the operator's skills. In fact, recent studies have shown that reproducibility and confidence in making a specific diagnosis of 2D US depends on the examiner's experience 5, 6…”

Standardized ultrasonography with cine-loop documentation : diagnostic variability in liver and kidney examinations

“…Therefore, this is usually considered as an operator-dependent method. In general, the results of traditional ultrasound examinations are regarded as subjective and highly dependent on the skill of the individual examiner (44, 45,47). A study by Faschingbauer et al compared the diagnostic performance in a group of examiners with four different levels of experience in gynecological US.…”