Accuracy is an interesting thing in medicine. There is an assumption, this unspoken hope, from those who seek medical care that the answer they get is correct. Certainty breeds confidence, and confidence (without reference to accuracy) breeds a measure of certainty. A diagnosis, confidently stated can lead to a feeling of reassurance, and that the answer/the diagnosis is accurate. Physicians are intensely trained, and have a high level of professionally acquired skill. However, medical practitioners are not perfect. The idea that medical purveyors are inacurate, and do not come up with the correct answer the first time (or the second or third time) propels the success of television dramas like House, M.D.
When thinking about curating a medical database of many user
submitted images, the topic of accuracy arises. Can we trust a citizen, a
user, a non-professional to contribute an image of a skin lesion? Will it be labeled with the correct diagnosis? In my mind this is an open question. As described previously,
we like to share images - think about the number of pictures uploaded to Facebook
daily. The number of encounters with medical professionals related to skin
issues far outstrips the number of pictures in currently available databases (see prior posts). It
is the belief of this project that people can be trusted to contribute to a
scientific project in a meaningful (meaning accurate) way. As a first pass, the uploaded image
will rely on the diagnostic accuracy of the medical professional who evaluates
the rash or lesion. It is trust given to the user/image contributor that they are contributing what a medical professional has communicated.
The question that has been in my mind recently – How accurate are
medical professionals when pronouncing a diagnosis regarding the skin?
I conducted a review in the published scientific literature and
come across some information shared below which will shed some light on this question. This is by no means an exhaustive review. If you are interested in the full paper please email me, however they are easily accessible via Pubmed. Below
you will find a listing of medical/scientific studies from the 1970s through to
the present which look into this question. The year of the study publication is
listed as well as the title of the medical paper and a brief description along with an accuracy rate in the text. In many cases accuracy is defined as the diagnosis given to the picture or patient after examination as compared to the correct diagnosis which is typically a biopsy-which serves as the final arbiter of correctness in skin diagnosis.
There is a range in the level of accuracy. It is not surprising that dermatologists, who have more experience with skin have higher accuracy rates. It is interesting to note that accuracy is not 100% for dermatologists all of the time.
1972 Accuracy
of Dermatologic Diagnosis by Television
Comparisons of
diagnoses made by black and white television viewing of slides of dermatologic
lesions to those made from directly viewing of the same slides in color revealed
that in 85% to 89% of cases the dermatologists were as accurate by television
as on direct examination. Color television improved accuracy only slightly, but
was more acceptable to the dermatologists as less time was required to reach a
diagnosis.
1983 The
Prevalence and Accuracy of Diagnosis of Non-Melanotic Skin Cancer in Victoria
Surveys of Victorian
[Australian] dermatologists and pathologists were undertaken to determine the
number of patients attending medical practitioners with non-melanotic [non-cancer] skin
cancers and solar keratoses. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis studies suggest
that the correct diagnosis of these tumors is being made clinically [in person] in
approximately 70% of cases by experienced clinicians.
1989 The
Development of Expertise in Dermatology
To examine
the development of expertise in dermatology at five levels of expertise. A total of 100
slides [pictures], 2 typical and 3 atypical, from each of 20 common skin disorders,
were presented to six subjects at each of the following levels: second-year
preclinical medical students, final year medical students, residents in family
medicine, general practitioners, and dermatologists. Accuracy of diagnosis rose
from 21% for medical students to 87% for dermatologists.
1990 Accuracy
in the Clinical Diagnosis of Malignant Melanoma
The computerized
database (1955 through 1982) of the Oncology Section of the Skin and Cancer
Unit of New York (NY) University Medical Center includes data on 13,878
lesions. Of these lesions, 214 were diagnosed clinically and histologically as
malignant melanoma (MM)...The diagnostic accuracy for the best period (1974
- 1982) was 64%. The diagnosis of MM was made in 84.5% of the
histologically proved cases of MM, reflecting a high degree of sensitivity.
2001 A
comparison of dermatologists' and primary care physicians' accuracy in diagnosing melanoma: a systematic review
Studies were evaluated to determine the sensitivity and specificity of
dermatologists' or PCPs' [Primary Care Providers - also known as general practitioners, commonly family doctors or internal medicine doctors in the US] ability to correctly diagnose lesions suggestive of
melanoma and to perform biopsies or refer patients with such lesions. For
diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity was 0.81 to 1.00 for dermatologists and 0.42
to 1.00 for PCPs. None of the studies reported specificity for dermatologists;
one reported specificity for PCPs (0.98). For biopsy or referral accuracy,
sensitivity ranged from 0.82 to 1.00 for dermatologists and 0.70 to 0.88 for
PCPs; specificity, 0.70 to 0.89 for dermatologists and 0.70 to 0.87 for PCPs.
Receiver operating characteristic curves for biopsy or referral ability were
inconclusive. The study concluded that published data are inadequate to demonstrate differences in dermatologists' and
PCPs' diagnostic and biopsy or referral accuracy of lesions suggestive of
melanoma.
2003 Comparison
of diagnostic accuracy for cutaneous malignant melanoma between general dermatology, plastic
surgery and pigmented lesion clinics.
Since the 1980s there
have been dedicated pigmented lesion clinics (PLCs) in the U.K. This study
compared the false-negative rate (FNR) of clinical diagnosis with other clinics
of primary referral of malignant melanoma (MM) in the same geographical area.
The case notes of 731
patients were available, of whom approximately two-thirds initially attended
the PLC, one-fifth the General Dermatology clinics (D) and the remainder were
divided approximately between Plastic Surgery clinics (P), other clinics (O)
and the general practitioner (GP). The FNR was lowest for the PLC, at 10%,
compared with 29% (D), 19% (P), 55% (O) and 54% (GP) (P < 0.0001).
**Accuraccy rates can
be considered 100 - percentage above (ie: Accuracy at the dermatology clinic:
100 - 29% false negatives = 71% accurate/true positive diagnosis.
2003 Pattern
analysis, not simplified algorithms, is the most reliable method for teaching dermoscopy for melanoma diagnosis to
residents in dermatology
This study
investigated the diagnostic performance of three different methods of teaching
dermoscopy when used by newly trained residents in dermatology to diagnose
melanocytic [cancerous] lesions. Pattern analysis yielded the best mean diagnostic accuracy
(68.7%), followed by the ABCD rule (56.1%) and the seven-point check-list
(53.4%, P = 0·06).
2004 A
retrospective biopsy study of the clinical diagnostic accuracy of common skin diseases by different
specialties compared with dermatology
The clinical diagnoses
of family physicians, plastic, general, and orthopedic surgeons, and internists
and pediatricians versus dermatologists were correlated with the
histopathologic diagnoses. In total, 4,451 cases were analyzed. Dermatologists
diagnosed twice the number of neoplastic and cystic skin lesions correctly
(75%) than nondermatologists (40%). The clinical diagnosis rendered by family
practitioners matched the histopathologic diagnosis in 26% of neoplastic and
cystic skin lesions. Inflammatory skin diseases were correctly diagnosed in 71%
of the cases by dermatologists but 34% of the cases by nondermatologists.
2004 Diagnostic
Accuracy and Image Quality Using a Digital Camera for Teledermatology
The study was designed
to evaluate the effectiveness of digital photography for dermatologic diagnoses
and compare it with in-person diagnoses. There was 83% concordance [agreement] between
in-person versus digital photo diagnoses. Concordance with biopsy
results [agreement about accuracy] was achieved in 76% of the cases. Image sharpness and color quality
were rated "good" to "excellent" 83% and 93% of the time,
respectively.
2008 Diagnostic
accuracy and appropriateness of general practitioner referrals to a dermatology out-patient clinic
A study was undertaken
of new referrals by GPs to a dermatology clinic in a district general hospital
over a 6-month period. 686 consecutive referrals to one
consultant were analyzed for diagnostic accuracy and requirement for referral.
47% of referral letters contained the correct diagnosis. Viral warts and
psoriasis were best diagnosed (82 and 78%, respectively). Seborrhoeic warts
and dermatofibromas caused difficulty (22 and 19%, respectively). Cutaneous
malignancy was correctly diagnosed in 45% of referrals, and eczema, the
commonest condition referred, in 54% of cases.
2009 Teledermatology:
A Review of Reliability and Accuracy of Diagnosis and Management
Accuracy rates ranged
from 30% to 92%for clinic dermatologists [meaning in person] and from 19% to
95% for tele-dermatologists [meaning diagnosis via picture image].
Tele-dermatologists
and clinic dermatologists completely agreed with each other in 41% to 94% of
cases. They had partial agreement in 50% to 100%.
2012 Accuracy in
skin cancer diagnosis: A retrospective study of an Australian public hospital dermatology department
Histology [under the microscope diagnosis] for
all skin biopsies and excisions performed in an 18-month period at a public hospital
dermatology department were reviewed. 6,546 biopsies/excisions were performed,
identifying 55 melanomas. The sensitivity [also often thought of as accuracy]
of melanoma diagnosis was 76%. 11% of melanomas were diagnosed as dysplastic
naevi (moles).
With regard to a skin image database another questions arises: Are 10,000 images that are 99% accurate better or worse than 1,000,000,000 images that are 60% accurate?
At this point I think it is still an open question.
No comments:
Post a Comment