BRADFORD SCHOLARS

    • Sign in
    View Item 
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Health Studies
    • Health Studies Publications
    • View Item
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Health Studies
    • Health Studies Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of Bradford ScholarsCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication DateThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication Date

    My Account

    Sign in

    HELP

    Bradford Scholars FAQsCopyright Fact SheetPolicies Fact SheetDeposit Terms and ConditionsDigital Preservation Policy

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Methodological standards in radiographer plain film reading performance studies.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Publication date
    2002
    Author
    Brealey, S.
    Scally, Andy J.
    Thomas, N.
    Keyword
    Plain film reading
    Radiographers
    Performance
    Methodological standards
    Peer-Reviewed
    yes
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The objectives of this paper are to raise awareness of the methodological standards that can affect the quality of radiographer plain-film reading performance studies and to determine the frequency with which these standards are fulfilled. Multiple search methods identified 30 such studies from between 1971 and the end of June 1999. The percentage of studies that fulfilled criteria for the 10 methodological standards were as follows. (1) Performance of a sample size calculation, 3%; (2) definition of a normal and abnormal report, 97%; (3) description of the sequence of events through which films passed before reporting, 94%; (4) analysis of individual groups of observers within a combination of groups, 50% (5) appropriate choice of reference standard, 80%; (6) appropriate choice of arbiter, 57%; (7) appropriate use of a control, 22%; (8) analysis of pertinent clinical subgroups, e.g. body areas, patient type, 44%; (9) availability of data for re-calculation, 59%; and (10) presentation of indeterminate results, 69%. These findings indicate variation in the application of the methodological standards to studies of radiographer's film reading performance. Careful consideration of these standards is an essential component of study quality and hence the validity of the evidence base used to underpin radiographic reporting policy.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10454/6418
    Version
    published version paper
    Citation
    Brealey, S., Scally, A. J. & Thomas, N. B. (2002) Methodological standards in plain film reporting studies. British Journal of Radiology, 75 (890): 107-113.
    Link to publisher’s version
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.75.890.750107
    Type
    Article
    Collections
    Health Studies Publications

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.