Skip to main content
. 2020 May 28;74(1):48–52. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2020-206511

Table 2.

Results of all pathologists for phase I (n=41)

Pathologist Percentage of cases ‘indefinite for dysplasia’ Percentage agreement
(three categories)*
Consensus LGD and HGD cases underdiagnosed as NDBO (n (%)) n=28
Core pathologists
 1 24.4 82.9 0
 2 9.8 80.5 2 (7.1)
 3 22.0 80.5 1 (3.6)
 4 7.3 87.8 1 (3.6)
 5 9.8 78.0 3 (10.7)
New core pathologists
 B 12.2 78.0 1 (3.6)
 E 12.2 75.6 1 (3.6)
 J 17.1 73.2 1 (3.6)
Aspirant panel members
 A 12.2 39.0 16 (57.0)
 C 14.6 58.5 1 (3.6)
 D 31.7 65.9 2 (7.1)
 F 12.2 70.7 0
 G 12.2 68.3 2 (7.1)
 H 7.3 68.3 1 (3.6)
 I 9.8 68.3 1 (3.6)
Benchmark value† ≤28 ≥69 ≤3 (11)

dary grey, score does not fall within benchmark values

light grey, score falls within benchmark values

*NDBO/IND/LGD+HGD.

†Based on eight core pathologists.

HGD, high-grade dysplasia; IND, indefinite for dysplasia; LGD, low-grade dysplasia; NDBO, non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus.