Kathleen F Kerr, Megan M Eguchi, Hannah Shucard, Trafton Drew, Donald L Weaver, Joann G Elmore, Tad T Brunyé
{"title":"先前诊断对第二意见和病理学家观察行为的影响:来自乳腺病理学随机试验的结果。","authors":"Kathleen F Kerr, Megan M Eguchi, Hannah Shucard, Trafton Drew, Donald L Weaver, Joann G Elmore, Tad T Brunyé","doi":"10.1177/0272989X251368886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo study the effects of exposure to a prior diagnosis (PD) on second opinions in breast pathology.Materials and MethodsPathologists interpreted digital breast biopsy cases in 2 phases separated by a washout. Phase 2 interpretations were randomly assigned to PD or no PD. When presented, PD was always more or less severe than a participant's phase 1 diagnosis. Viewing behaviors, including zoom level, were recorded during all interpretations. Twenty pathologists yielded 556 interpretations of 32 different cases.ResultsPathologists were 71% more likely to give a less severe diagnosis when exposed to a less severe PD than with no PD (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.33-2.20, <i>P</i> < 0.001). In comparison, when exposed to a more severe PD than with no PD, pathologists were 27% more likely to give a more severe diagnosis, but the effect was not significant (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87-1.86, <i>P</i> = 0.223). Compared with no PD, viewing behavior shifted toward more focus on critical image regions with exposure to a less severe PD and toward higher zoom levels with exposure to a more severe PD.DiscussionResults indicate anchoring and confirmation biases from PD exposure, such that second opinions after PD exposure are not independent assessments. Viewing behaviors illustrated how PD alters the interpretive process, including increased zooming when exposed to a more severe PD. Results have implications for best practices for computer-aided diagnosis tools.ImplicationsWhen giving a second opinion, exposure to a PD can sway diagnostic classifications and alter interpretive behavior, highlighting a need for protocols that encourage independent assessments.HighlightsIn pathology diagnosis, second opinions are systematically influenced by prior diagnostic information.Less severe prior diagnoses shift pathologists' visual attention toward clinically critical regions of a pathology image, whereas more severe prior diagnoses tend to elicit increased magnification during case interpretation.Specific viewing behaviors partially mediate the effect of prior diagnoses on second opinion diagnoses.When prior diagnoses are disclosed to pathologists, anchoring and confirmation biases undermine the independence of second opinion decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"272989X251368886"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Prior Diagnosis on Second Opinions and Pathologist Viewing Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Trial in Breast Pathology.\",\"authors\":\"Kathleen F Kerr, Megan M Eguchi, Hannah Shucard, Trafton Drew, Donald L Weaver, Joann G Elmore, Tad T Brunyé\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0272989X251368886\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectiveTo study the effects of exposure to a prior diagnosis (PD) on second opinions in breast pathology.Materials and MethodsPathologists interpreted digital breast biopsy cases in 2 phases separated by a washout. Phase 2 interpretations were randomly assigned to PD or no PD. When presented, PD was always more or less severe than a participant's phase 1 diagnosis. Viewing behaviors, including zoom level, were recorded during all interpretations. Twenty pathologists yielded 556 interpretations of 32 different cases.ResultsPathologists were 71% more likely to give a less severe diagnosis when exposed to a less severe PD than with no PD (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.33-2.20, <i>P</i> < 0.001). In comparison, when exposed to a more severe PD than with no PD, pathologists were 27% more likely to give a more severe diagnosis, but the effect was not significant (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87-1.86, <i>P</i> = 0.223). Compared with no PD, viewing behavior shifted toward more focus on critical image regions with exposure to a less severe PD and toward higher zoom levels with exposure to a more severe PD.DiscussionResults indicate anchoring and confirmation biases from PD exposure, such that second opinions after PD exposure are not independent assessments. Viewing behaviors illustrated how PD alters the interpretive process, including increased zooming when exposed to a more severe PD. Results have implications for best practices for computer-aided diagnosis tools.ImplicationsWhen giving a second opinion, exposure to a PD can sway diagnostic classifications and alter interpretive behavior, highlighting a need for protocols that encourage independent assessments.HighlightsIn pathology diagnosis, second opinions are systematically influenced by prior diagnostic information.Less severe prior diagnoses shift pathologists' visual attention toward clinically critical regions of a pathology image, whereas more severe prior diagnoses tend to elicit increased magnification during case interpretation.Specific viewing behaviors partially mediate the effect of prior diagnoses on second opinion diagnoses.When prior diagnoses are disclosed to pathologists, anchoring and confirmation biases undermine the independence of second opinion decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"272989X251368886\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251368886\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251368886","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的探讨事先诊断(PD)对乳腺病理第二意见的影响。材料与方法病理学家将数字乳腺活检病例分为两个阶段进行解释。第2期口译随机分为PD组和非PD组。当出现时,PD总是比参与者的第一阶段诊断更严重或更严重。在所有解译过程中记录观看行为,包括缩放级别。20位病理学家对32个不同的病例做出了556种解释。结果当暴露于较轻的PD时,病理学家给出较轻诊断的可能性比暴露于无PD时高71% (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.33-2.20, P < 0.001)。相比之下,当暴露于更严重的PD时,病理学家给出更严重诊断的可能性比没有PD时高27%,但效果不显著(RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87-1.86, P = 0.223)。与无PD组相比,暴露于轻度PD组时,观看行为更倾向于关注关键图像区域,暴露于重度PD组时,观看行为更倾向于提高变焦水平。讨论结果表明PD暴露的锚定和确认偏差,因此PD暴露后的第二意见不是独立的评估。观察行为说明了PD如何改变解释过程,包括当暴露于更严重的PD时增加缩放。结果对计算机辅助诊断工具的最佳实践具有启示意义。当给出第二意见时,暴露于PD可能会影响诊断分类并改变解释行为,强调需要鼓励独立评估的协议。在病理诊断中,第二意见系统地受到先前诊断信息的影响。较不严重的先前诊断将病理学家的视觉注意力转移到病理图像的临床关键区域,而较严重的先前诊断往往会在病例解释过程中引起放大。特定的观看行为在一定程度上介导了先前诊断对第二意见诊断的影响。当先前的诊断向病理学家披露时,锚定和确认偏见破坏了第二意见决定的独立性。
Effects of Prior Diagnosis on Second Opinions and Pathologist Viewing Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Trial in Breast Pathology.
ObjectiveTo study the effects of exposure to a prior diagnosis (PD) on second opinions in breast pathology.Materials and MethodsPathologists interpreted digital breast biopsy cases in 2 phases separated by a washout. Phase 2 interpretations were randomly assigned to PD or no PD. When presented, PD was always more or less severe than a participant's phase 1 diagnosis. Viewing behaviors, including zoom level, were recorded during all interpretations. Twenty pathologists yielded 556 interpretations of 32 different cases.ResultsPathologists were 71% more likely to give a less severe diagnosis when exposed to a less severe PD than with no PD (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.33-2.20, P < 0.001). In comparison, when exposed to a more severe PD than with no PD, pathologists were 27% more likely to give a more severe diagnosis, but the effect was not significant (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87-1.86, P = 0.223). Compared with no PD, viewing behavior shifted toward more focus on critical image regions with exposure to a less severe PD and toward higher zoom levels with exposure to a more severe PD.DiscussionResults indicate anchoring and confirmation biases from PD exposure, such that second opinions after PD exposure are not independent assessments. Viewing behaviors illustrated how PD alters the interpretive process, including increased zooming when exposed to a more severe PD. Results have implications for best practices for computer-aided diagnosis tools.ImplicationsWhen giving a second opinion, exposure to a PD can sway diagnostic classifications and alter interpretive behavior, highlighting a need for protocols that encourage independent assessments.HighlightsIn pathology diagnosis, second opinions are systematically influenced by prior diagnostic information.Less severe prior diagnoses shift pathologists' visual attention toward clinically critical regions of a pathology image, whereas more severe prior diagnoses tend to elicit increased magnification during case interpretation.Specific viewing behaviors partially mediate the effect of prior diagnoses on second opinion diagnoses.When prior diagnoses are disclosed to pathologists, anchoring and confirmation biases undermine the independence of second opinion decisions.
期刊介绍:
Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.