Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2013
Accuracy of internet images of glenoid labral injuries.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Freeman R, Ashouri F, Papanikitas J, Ricketts D
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The internet is a convenient source of health information used widely by patients and doctors. Previous studies have found that the written information provided was often inaccurate. There is no literature regarding the accuracy of medical images on the internet. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of internet images of injuries to the glenoid labrum following shoulder dislocation.
METHODS: The Google and Bing search engines were used to find images of Bankart, Perthes and anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions. Three independent reviewers assessed the accuracy of image labelling.
RESULTS: Of images labelled 'Bankart lesion', 30% (9/30) were incorrect while 'Perthes lesion' images were incorrect in 15% of cases (9/60) and 4% of 'ALPSA lesion' images were incorrect (2/46). There was good interobserver reliability (kappa = 0.81). Labelling accuracy was better on educational sites than on commercial sites (6% vs 25% inaccurate, p=0.0013).
CONCLUSIONS: Caution is recommended when interpreting non-peer reviewed images on the internet.
METHODS: The Google and Bing search engines were used to find images of Bankart, Perthes and anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions. Three independent reviewers assessed the accuracy of image labelling.
RESULTS: Of images labelled 'Bankart lesion', 30% (9/30) were incorrect while 'Perthes lesion' images were incorrect in 15% of cases (9/60) and 4% of 'ALPSA lesion' images were incorrect (2/46). There was good interobserver reliability (kappa = 0.81). Labelling accuracy was better on educational sites than on commercial sites (6% vs 25% inaccurate, p=0.0013).
CONCLUSIONS: Caution is recommended when interpreting non-peer reviewed images on the internet.