Evaluation of an interactive science publishing tool: toward enabling three-dimensional analysis of medical images

Higher resolution medical imaging platforms are rapidly emerging, but there is a challenge in applying these tools in a clinically meaningful way. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate a novel three-dimensional (3D) software imaging environment, known as interactive science publishing (ISP), in appraising 3D computed tomography images and to compare this approach with traditional planar (2D) imaging in a series of lung cancer cases.

Twenty-four physician volunteers at different levels of training across multiple specialties were recruited to evaluate eight lung cancer-related clinical vignettes. The volunteers were asked to compare the performance of traditional 2D versus the ISP 3D imaging in assessing different visualization environments for diagnostic and measurement processes and to further evaluate the ISP tool in terms of general satisfaction, usability, and probable applicability.

Volunteers were satisfied with both imaging methods; however, the 3D environment had significantly higher ratings. Measurement performance was comparable using both traditional 2D and 3D image evaluation. Physicians not trained in 2D measurement approaches versus those with such training demonstrated better performance with ISP and preferred working in the ISP environment.

Recent postgraduates with only modest self-administered training performed equally well on 3D and 2D cases. This suggests that the 3D environment has no reduction in accuracy over the conventional 2D approach, while providing the advantage of a digital environment for cross-disciplinary interaction for shared problem solving. Exploration of more effective, efficient, self-directed training could potentially result in further improvement in image evaluation proficiency and potentially decrease training costs.