Table 2.
Distribution of diagnoses by reader for 3 readings of glass slides and 2 readings of digitized images among 248 cases where readers initially disagreed
| Negative % |
CIN1 % |
CIN2 % |
CIN3/AIS % |
Cancer % |
Marginal homogeneity p-value |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community diagnosis | 0.0 | 0.0 | 69.0 | 29.8 | 1.2 | |||
| Reader 1 | Slide | read 1 | 18.1 | 51.6 | 14.9 | 13.7 | 1.6 | |
| read 2 | 20.6 | 34.3 | 28.6 | 15.3 | 1.2 | |||
| read 3 | 21.8 | 43.1 | 23.0 | 10.5 | 1.6 | <0.001a | ||
| Image | read 1 | 20.2 | 45.2 | 20.2 | 13.7 | 0.8 | ||
| read 2 | 28.2 | 46.0 | 19.0 | 5.6 | 1.2 | <0.001a | ||
| Reader 2 | Slide | read 1 | 21.0 | 30.2 | 36.3 | 11.7 | 0.8 | |
| read 2 | 17.7 | 22.6 | 44.0 | 15.7 | 0.0 | |||
| read 3 | 17.7 | 23.0 | 48.4 | 10.1 | 0.8 | <0.001a | ||
| Image | read 1 | 27.4 | 30.2 | 33.9 | 8.1 | 0.4 | ||
| read 2 | 31.0 | 34.3 | 29.4 | 4.8 | 0.4 | 0.002a | ||
| Reader 3 | Slide | read 1 | 13.7 | 1.6 | 63.7 | 21.0 | 0.0 | |
| read 2 | 9.7 | 9.3 | 56.5 | 24.6 | 0.0 | |||
| read 3 | 10.1 | 18.5 | 45.6 | 25.0 | 0.8 | <0.001a | ||
| Image | read 1 | 10.1 | 25.0 | 46.0 | 19.0 | 0.0 | ||
| read 2 | 15.3 | 22.2 | 41.9 | 20.2 | 0.4 | 0.06 | ||
Excludes 2 cases where slide or image was judged unsatisfactory for at least one reader.
The distribution of diagnoses was significantly different between all readers for both slides and images, p <0.001. All readers showed significant differences in the distribution of diagnoses between slides and images, p <0.001.
a
Statistically significant at p<.05 threshold.