Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Blind Procedures02:07

Blind Procedures

Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which child was...
Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan01:30

Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan

Description
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ventilation Perfusion Scans are two radiological investigations that offer detailed diagnostic images of the body, particularly lung structures.
MRI
MRI uses magnetic fields and radiofrequency signals to distinguish between normal and abnormal tissues. This technology provides a more detailed diagnostic image than CT scans, enabling it to characterize pulmonary nodules, stage bronchogenic carcinoma, and evaluate inflammatory activity in...
Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT01:30

Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT

Radiological investigations, including X-rays and computed tomography (CT) scans, are critical for diagnosing and evaluating various medical conditions. These imaging techniques provide valuable insights into the body's internal structures, aiding in the detection of abnormalities, assessment of disease progression, and development of treatment strategies. This article delves into two primary radiological investigations, chest X-rays and CT scans, outlining their purpose, procedures, and the...
Blinding01:11

Blinding

Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Trends in lipoprotein(a) testing and impact on clinical care: A contemporary systemwide analysis.

American journal of preventive cardiology·2026
Same author

Gadolinium toxicity: mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and nanoparticle role.

Archives of toxicology·2025
Same author

Association of Preoperative Functional Status With Short-Term Major Adverse Outcomes After Cardiac Surgery.

Cureus·2025
Same author

Implementation of guideline-based lipid reporting and rate of lipid lowering therapy prescription.

Journal of clinical lipidology·2025
Same author

Gadolinium Elimination in a Gadolinium Deposition Disease Population After a Single Exposure to Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents.

Investigative radiology·2024
Same author

Integration of Psychological Services With Preventive Cardiology Consults: A Feasibility Study.

American journal of lifestyle medicine·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 16, 2026

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing
09:00

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing

Published on: August 16, 2024

Evaluation of radiologist interpretive performance using blinded reads by multiple external readers.

Andrew F Ryan1, Richard C Semelka, Paul L Molina

  • 1Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7510, USA.

Investigative Radiology
|February 24, 2010
PubMed
Summary

Assessing radiologic diagnostic agreement requires multiple blinded external readers to evaluate interpretation variability. This method highlights performance differences, especially in complex cases, aiding quality assurance and medicolegal reviews.

More Related Videos

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer (IBEX) for Radiomics
10:17

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer (IBEX) for Radiomics

Published on: January 8, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 16, 2026

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing
09:00

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing

Published on: August 16, 2024

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer (IBEX) for Radiomics
10:17

Guidelines and Experience Using Imaging Biomarker Explorer (IBEX) for Radiomics

Published on: January 8, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Radiology
  • Medical Imaging
  • Diagnostic Accuracy

Background:

  • Assessing radiologic diagnostic agreement is crucial for quality assurance.
  • Variability in interpretation can impact patient care and medicolegal outcomes.
  • Standardized methods are needed to evaluate radiologist performance objectively.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To demonstrate a novel method for assessing radiologic diagnostic agreement.
  • To utilize multiple blinded external readers for objective case interpretation.
  • To quantify inter-reader variability in interpreting computed tomography (CT) studies.

Main Methods:

  • Six body CT studies were anonymized and provided with clinical histories.
  • Thirty-one external radiologists from 22 centers served as blinded secondary readers.
  • Aggregate analysis with a consensus majority as the surrogate gold standard was employed.

Main Results:

  • A wide range of interpretations was observed among the secondary readers.
  • Interpretation variability increased with case complexity and vague clinical complaints.
  • The primary interpretation showed agreement with the surrogate gold standard for each case.

Conclusions:

  • The demonstrated method effectively highlights radiologist performance variability.
  • Aggregate analysis and agreement cutoffs are necessary to mitigate bias.
  • This evaluation method is applicable to quality assurance, competency assessment, and medicolegal evaluations.