In an experimental study of reader experience in identifying the variables essential to grading bone neoplasms, reader error is measured against book grade, a human consensus of the presence or absence of key variables. The average accuracy for classifying focal lesions into slow or fast categories is 83.4% for 890 readings as compared with average diagnostic accuracy of 53.7%. Analyses of human error have provided insight into how to improve the grading algorithm without significant loss of its ability to separate lesions into meaningful categories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lodwick et al. (1980) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: