Increasing navigation speed at endoluminal CT colonography reduces colonic visualization and polyp identification

Purpose: To investigate the effect of increasing navigation speed on the visual search and decision making during polyp identification for computed tomography (CT) colonography. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board permission was obtained to use deidentified CT colonography data for this prospective reader study. After obtaining informed consent from the readers, 12 CT colonography fly-through examinations that depicted eight polyps were presented at four different fixed navigation speeds to 23 radiologists. Speeds ranged from 1 cm/sec to 4.5 cm/sec. Gaze position was tracked by using an infrared eye tracker, and readers indicated that they saw a polyp by clicking a mouse. Patterns of searching and decision making by speed were investigated graphically and by multilevel modeling. Results: Readers identified polyps correctly in 56 of 77 (72.7%) of viewings at the slowest speed but in only 137 of 225 (60.9%) of viewings at the fastest speed (P = .004). They also identified fewer false-positive features at faster speeds (42 of 115; 36.5%) of videos at slowest speed, 89 of 345 (25.8%) at fastest, P = .02). Gaze location was highly concentrated toward the central quarter of the screen area at faster speeds (mean gaze points at slowest speed vs fastest speed, 86% vs 97%, respectively). Conclusion: Faster navigation speed at endoluminal CT colonography led to progressive restriction of visual search patterns. Greater speed also reduced both true-positive and false-positive colorectal polyp identification

Diagnostic performance of sonographic activity scores for adult terminal ileal Crohn’s disease compared to magnetic resonance and histological reference standards:experience from the METRIC trial

Objectives: The simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn’s disease (SUS-CD) and bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) are promising intestinal ultrasound (IUS) indices of CD, but studied mainly in small settings with few sonographers. We compared SUS-CD and BUSS against histological and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) reference standards in a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicentre, multireader trial. Methods: Participants recruited to the METRIC trial (ISRCTN03982913) were studied, including those with available terminal ileal (TI) biopsies. Sensitivity and specificity of SUS-CD and BUSS for TI CD activity were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), from the prospective observations of the original METRIC trial sonographers against the histological activity index (HAI) and the simplified magnetic resonance index of activity (sMARIA). Results: We included 284 patients (median 31.5 years, IQR 23–46) from 8 centres, who underwent IUS and MRE. Of these, 111 patients had available terminal ileal biopsies with HAI scoring. Against histology, sensitivity and specificity for active disease were 79% (95% CI 69–86%) and 50% (31–69%) for SUS-CD, and 66% (56–75%) and 68% (47–84%) for BUSS, respectively. Compared to sMARIA, the sensitivity and specificity for active CD were 81% (74–86%) and 75% (66–83%) for SUS-CD, and 68% (61–74%) and 85% (76–91%) for BUSS, respectively. The sensitivity of SUS-CD was significantly greater than that of BUSS against HAI and sMARIA (p &lt; 0.001), but its specificity was significantly lower than of BUSS against the MRE reference standard (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Particularly when compared to MRE activity scoring, SUS-CD and BUSS are promising tools in a real-world clinical setting.Clinical relevance statement: When tested using data from a multicentre, multireader diagnostic accuracy trial, the simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn’s disease (SUS-CD) and bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) were clinically viable intestinal ultrasound indices that were reasonably sensitive and specific for terminal ileal Crohn’s disease, especially when compared to a magnetic resonance reference standard.</p

Diagnostic performance of sonographic activity scores for adult terminal ileal Crohn's disease compared to magnetic resonance and histological reference standards: experience from the METRIC trial

OBJECTIVES: The simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn's disease (SUS-CD) and bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) are promising intestinal ultrasound (IUS) indices of CD, but studied mainly in small settings with few sonographers. We compared SUS-CD and BUSS against histological and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) reference standards in a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicentre, multireader trial. METHODS: Participants recruited to the METRIC trial (ISRCTN03982913) were studied, including those with available terminal ileal (TI) biopsies. Sensitivity and specificity of SUS-CD and BUSS for TI CD activity were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), from the prospective observations of the original METRIC trial sonographers against the histological activity index (HAI) and the simplified magnetic resonance index of activity (sMARIA). RESULTS: We included 284 patients (median 31.5 years, IQR 23-46) from 8 centres, who underwent IUS and MRE. Of these, 111 patients had available terminal ileal biopsies with HAI scoring. Against histology, sensitivity and specificity for active disease were 79% (95% CI 69-86%) and 50% (31-69%) for SUS-CD, and 66% (56-75%) and 68% (47-84%) for BUSS, respectively. Compared to sMARIA, the sensitivity and specificity for active CD were 81% (74-86%) and 75% (66-83%) for SUS-CD, and 68% (61-74%) and 85% (76-91%) for BUSS, respectively. The sensitivity of SUS-CD was significantly greater than that of BUSS against HAI and sMARIA (p < 0.001), but its specificity was significantly lower than of BUSS against the MRE reference standard (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Particularly when compared to MRE activity scoring, SUS-CD and BUSS are promising tools in a real-world clinical setting. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: When tested using data from a multicentre, multireader diagnostic accuracy trial, the simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn's disease (SUS-CD) and bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) were clinically viable intestinal ultrasound indices that were reasonably sensitive and specific for terminal ileal Crohn's disease, especially when compared to a magnetic resonance reference standard. KEY POINTS: The simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn's disease and bowel ultrasound score are promising intestinal ultrasound indices of Crohn's disease but to date studied mainly in small settings with few sonographers. Compared to histology and the magnetic resonance reference standard in a multicentre, multireader setting, the sensitivity of simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn's disease is significantly greater than that of bowel ultrasound score. The specificity of simple ultrasound activity score for Crohn's disease was significantly lower than that of bowel ultrasound score compared to the magnetic resonance enterography reference standard. The specificity of both indices was numerically higher when the magnetic resonance enterography reference standard was adopted

A realist evaluation of the role of communities of practice in changing healthcare practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Healthcare organisations seeking to manage knowledge and improve organisational performance are increasingly investing in communities of practice (CoPs). Such investments are being made in the absence of empirical evidence demonstrating the impact of CoPs in improving the delivery of healthcare. A realist evaluation is proposed to address this knowledge gap. Underpinned by the principle that outcomes are determined by the context in which an intervention is implemented, a realist evaluation is well suited to understand the role of CoPs in improving healthcare practice. By applying a realist approach, this study will explore the following questions: What outcomes do CoPs achieve in healthcare? Do these outcomes translate into improved practice in healthcare? What are the contexts and mechanisms by which CoPs improve healthcare?</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The realist evaluation will be conducted by developing, testing, and refining theories on how, why, and when CoPs improve healthcare practice. When collecting data, context will be defined as the setting in which the CoP operates; mechanisms will be the factors and resources that the community offers to influence a change in behaviour or action; and outcomes will be defined as a change in behaviour or work practice that occurs as a result of accessing resources provided by the CoP.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Realist evaluation is being used increasingly to study social interventions where context plays an important role in determining outcomes. This study further enhances the value of realist evaluations by incorporating a social network analysis component to quantify the structural context associated with CoPs. By identifying key mechanisms and contexts that optimise the effectiveness of CoPs, this study will contribute to creating a framework that will guide future establishment and evaluation of CoPs in healthcare.</p

Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study

OBJECTIVES: Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been demonstrated to be efficient and cost-effective for cancer staging. The study aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity for metastasis detection and reduce reading times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 438 prospectively collected WB-MRI scans from multicenter Streamline studies (February 2013-September 2016) was undertaken. Disease sites were manually labeled using Streamline reference standard. Whole-body MRI scans were randomly allocated to training and testing sets. A model for malignant lesion detection was developed based on convolutional neural networks and a 2-stage training strategy. The final algorithm generated lesion probability heat maps. Using a concurrent reader paradigm, 25 radiologists (18 experienced, 7 inexperienced in WB-/MRI) were randomly allocated WB-MRI scans with or without ML support to detect malignant lesions over 2 or 3 reading rounds. Reads were undertaken in the setting of a diagnostic radiology reading room between November 2019 and March 2020. Reading times were recorded by a scribe. Prespecified analysis included sensitivity, specificity, interobserver agreement, and reading time of radiology readers to detect metastases with or without ML support. Reader performance for detection of the primary tumor was also evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-three evaluable WB-MRI scans were allocated to algorithm training (245) or radiology testing (50 patients with metastases, from primary 117 colon [n = 117] or lung [n = 71] cancer). Among a total 562 reads by experienced radiologists over 2 reading rounds, per-patient specificity was 86.2% (ML) and 87.7% (non-ML) (-1.5% difference; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.4%, 3.5%; P = 0.39). Sensitivity was 66.0% (ML) and 70.0% (non-ML) (-4.0% difference; 95% CI, -13.5%, 5.5%; P = 0.344). Among 161 reads by inexperienced readers, per-patient specificity in both groups was 76.3% (0% difference; 95% CI, -15.0%, 15.0%; P = 0.613), with sensitivity of 73.3% (ML) and 60.0% (non-ML) (13.3% difference; 95% CI, -7.9%, 34.5%; P = 0.313). Per-site specificity was high (>90%) for all metastatic sites and experience levels. There was high sensitivity for the detection of primary tumors (lung cancer detection rate of 98.6% with and without ML [0.0% difference; 95% CI, -2.0%, 2.0%; P = 1.00], colon cancer detection rate of 89.0% with and 90.6% without ML [-1.7% difference; 95% CI, -5.6%, 2.2%; P = 0.65]). When combining all reads from rounds 1 and 2, reading times fell by 6.2% (95% CI, -22.8%, 10.0%) when using ML. Round 2 read-times fell by 32% (95% CI, 20.8%, 42.8%) compared with round 1. Within round 2, there was a significant decrease in read-time when using ML support, estimated as 286 seconds (or 11%) quicker (P = 0.0281), using regression analysis to account for reader experience, read round, and tumor type. Interobserver variance suggests moderate agreement, Cohen κ = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (with ML), and Cohen κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (without ML). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a significant difference in per-patient sensitivity and specificity for detecting metastases or the primary tumor using concurrent ML compared with standard WB-MRI. Radiology read-times with or without ML support fell for round 2 reads compared with round 1, suggesting that readers familiarized themselves with the study reading method. During the second reading round, there was a significant reduction in reading time when using ML support

How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature

Background: Communities of Practice (CoPs) are promoted in the healthcare sector as a means of generating and sharing knowledge and improving organisational performance. However CoPs vary considerably in the way they are structured and operate in the sector. If CoPs are to be cultivated to benefit healthcare organisations, there is a need to examine and understand their application to date. To this end, a systematic review of the literature on CoPs was conducted, to examine how and why CoPs have been established and whether they have been shown to improve healthcare practice. Methods. Peer-reviewed empirical research papers on CoPs in the healthcare sector were identified by searching electronic health-databases. Information on the purpose of establishing CoPs, their composition, methods by which members communicate and share information or knowledge, and research methods used to examine effectiveness was extracted and reviewed. Also examined was evidence of whether or not CoPs led to a change in healthcare practice. Results: Thirty-one primary research papers and two systematic reviews were identified and reviewed in detail. There was a trend from descriptive to evaluative research. The focus of CoPs in earlier publications was on learning and exchanging information and knowledge, whereas in more recently published research, CoPs were used more as a tool to improve clinical practice and to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practice. Means by which members communicated with each other varied, but in none of the primary research studies was the method of communication examined in terms of the CoP achieving its objectives. Researchers are increasing their efforts to assess the effectiveness of CoPs in healthcare, however the interventions have been complex and multifaceted, making it difficult to directly attribute the change to the CoP. Conclusions: In keeping with Wenger and colleagues' description, CoPs in the healthcare sector vary in form and purpose. While researchers are increasing their efforts to examine the impact of CoPs in healthcare, cultivating CoPs to improve healthcare performance requires a greater understanding of how to establish and support CoPs to maximise their potential to improve healthcare

The development, design, testing, refinement, simulation and application of an evaluation framework for communities of practice and social-professional networks

Background. Communities of practice and social-professional networks are generally considered to enhance workplace experience and enable organizational success. However, despite the remarkable growth in interest in the role of collaborating structures in a range of industries, there is a paucity of empirical research to support this view. Nor is there a convincing model for their systematic evaluation, despite the significant potential benefits in answering the core question: how well do groups of professionals work together and how could they be organised to work together more effectively? This research project will produce a rigorous evaluation methodology and deliver supporting tools for the benefit of researchers, policymakers, practitioners and consumers within the health system and other sectors. Given the prevalence and importance of communities of practice and social networks, and the extent of investments in them, this project represents a scientific innovation of national and international significance. Methods and design. Working in four conceptual phases the project will employ a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to develop, design, field-test, refine and finalise an evaluation framework. Once available the framework will be used to evaluate simulated, and then later existing, health care communities of practice and social-professional networks to assess their effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes. Peak stakeholder groups have agreed to involve a wide range of members and participant organisations, and will facilitate access to various policy, managerial and clinical networks. Discussion. Given its scope and size, the project represents a valuable opportunity to achieve breakthroughs at two levels; firstly, by introducing novel and innovative aims and methods into the social research process and, secondly, through the resulting evaluation framework and tools. We anticipate valuable outcomes in the improved understanding of organisational performance and delivery of care. The project's wider appeal lies in transferring this understanding to other health jurisdictions and to other industries and sectors, both nationally and internationally. This means not merely publishing the results, but contextually interpreting them, and translating them to advance the knowledge base and enable widespread institutional and organisational application

Epistemologie der Erziehungswissenschaft: Dilemmas, Fragen, mögliche Lösungen

U radu se polazi od tvrdnje da su epistemološke karakteristike temeljne odrednice znanstvenog digniteta znanosti. Na osnovi kritičke analize epistemoloških karakteristika pedagogije upozorava se na upitnost njezina znanstvenog digniteta. Navedena se tvrdnja obrazlaže odgovorima na nekoliko pitanja: Je li razina razvijenosti suvremenog društva nametnula potrebu redefiniranja semantičkog određenja osnovnih pojmova i pedagogije same? Može li se pedagogija koja desetljećima nije promijenila svoj osnovni teorijski, epistemološko-metodologijski koncept, smatrati suvremenom? Ima li Hrvatska suvremenu pedagogiju ili je riječ o tradicionalnoj (zastarjeloj) pedagogiji? Što je osnovna funkcija pedagogije? Je li pedagogija znanost o odgoju, znanost o odgoju i obrazovanju ili znanost o osposobljavanju ljudi? Jesu li cilj i zadaci pedagogijske znanosti jednoznačno određeni? Na kraju se navode moguća rješenja. Predlažu se nova suvremena jednoznačna semantička određenja temeljnih pojmova i s tog se aspekta utvrđuje osnovna funkcija pedagogije i kao znanstvene i kao praktične discipline, kao teorije osposobljavanja.The argumentation presented in the paper starts from the premise that epistemological characteristics are the elements that science builds its scientific dignity on. A critical analysis of the epistemological characteristics of pedagogy has led the author to question its scientific dignity. The doubts stated in the paper are raised by several questions. Is the level of development of the modern society forcing us to redefine the semantic components of basic pedagogical terms and pedagogy itself? Can pedagogy, which has not changed its basic theoretical, epistemological and methodological concept for decades, really be termed contemporary? Is pedagogy in Croatia contemporary or do we still practice the traditional (and outdated) form of pedagogy? What is the main function of pedagogy? Is pedagogy the science of education, the science of education and development, or the science of human resources development? Are the goals and tasks of pedagogy as a science unambiguously set? Finally, the author suggests possible answers, advocating new, modern and unambiguous semantic definitions of the basic terms, thus determining the primary function of pedagogy as both scientific and practical discipline – a human resources development theory.Den Ausgangspunkt dieser Arbeit bildet die These, dass epistemologische Charakteristiken die wissenschaftliche Dignität jeder Wissenschaft begründen. Anhand einer kritischen Analyse von epistemologischen Charakteristiken der Erziehungswissenschaft wird auf die Fragwürdigkeit ihrer wissenschaftlichen Dignität hingewiesen, Die angeführte Behauptung wird durch Antworten auf einige Fragen erklärt: Macht die Entwicklungsebene der modernen Gesellschaft eine Redefinition der semantischen Bestimmungen pädagogischer Grundbegriffe und der Pädagogik selbst erforderlichß Kann die Erziehungswissenschaft, die seit Jahrzehnten ihr theoretisches, epistemologisch – methodologisches Grundkonzept nicht geändert hat, als modern gelten? Hat Kroatien eine moderne Erziehungswissenschaft oder ob es um eine traditionelle (veraltete) Pädagogik handelt? Was ist die Grundaufgabe der Pädagogik? Ist die Pädagogik eine Wissenschaft über die Erziehung, Wissenschaft über die Erziehung und Bildung oder Wissenschaft über die Befähigung der Menschen? Lassen sich das Ziel und die Aufgaben der Erziehungswissenschaft eindeutig bestimmen? Am Ende werden mögliche Lösungen angeführt. Vorgeschlagen werden neue moderne eindeutige semantische Bestimmungen der pädagogischen Grundbegriffe und von diesem Standpunkt aus Grundaufgaben der Pädagogik sowohl als wissenschaftlicher als auch praktischer Disziplin sowie einer Befähigungstheorie festgelegt