Variability in physician assessment of lesions in cutaneous images and its implications for skin screening and computer-assisted diagnosis.

BACKGROUND AND DESIGN The diagnosis of skin lesions is a three-part process of (1) screening for abnormalities, (2) examining lesions closely for the presence of important clinical characteristics, and (3) choosing a diagnosis based on the clinical data gathered. The first step, screening for abnormal areas, is of particular interest for anyone wishing to understand and automate the diagnostic process. As part of ongoing research into lesion detection and measurement, we examined the reproducibility and reliability of dermatologists who were asked to screen sets of cutaneous digital images and high-resolution photographs for the presence of skin lesions. RESULTS The intraobserver and interobserver variation in this task was considerable. The average reproducibilities and reliabilities were approximately 85%. The photographs did not produce significantly better overall screening results than the moderately low-resolution digital images. CONCLUSIONS Even highly trained dermatologists appear to differ significantly in their initial interpretations of skin images, both from observer to observer and within observers from session to session. These differences were reflected in all measures of diagnostic sensitivity, reproducibility, and reliability assessed. The magnitude of this variation is relatively insensitive to the means used to measure it, and is not simply due to different individual standards for diagnosis. It is highly unlikely that this variation is attributable to the images themselves, since the overall results were nearly identical for moderately low-resolution digital formats and very high-resolution photographs. These findings have important implications for determining where errors may take place in dermatologic screening and for automating the process of detecting changes in skin lesions over time.

[1]  A. Kopf,et al.  Clinical characteristics of malignant melanomas developing in persons with dysplastic nevi , 1990, Cancer.

[2]  K Wolff,et al.  In vivo epiluminescence microscopy of pigmented skin lesions. I. Pattern analysis of pigmented skin lesions. , 1987, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[3]  K Wolff,et al.  In vivo epiluminescence microscopy of pigmented skin lesions. II. Diagnosis of small pigmented skin lesions and early detection of malignant melanoma. , 1987, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[4]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[5]  A. Kopf,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy in malignant melanoma. , 1975, Archives of dermatology.

[6]  M. Swerdlow Nevi; a problem of misdiagnosis. , 1952, American journal of clinical pathology.

[7]  Michael Landthaler,et al.  SKIN SURFACE MICROSCOPY , 1989, The Lancet.

[8]  J. Yerushalmy The statistical assessment of the variability in observer perception and description of roentgenographic pulmonary shadows. , 1969, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[9]  R. Lew,et al.  Screening for melanoma/skin cancer: theoretic and practical considerations. , 1989, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[10]  C. Grin,et al.  Accuracy in the clinical diagnosis of malignant melanoma. , 1990, Archives of dermatology.

[11]  F H Rampen,et al.  Referral pattern and accuracy of clinical diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma. , 1988, Acta dermato-venereologica.

[12]  D A Perednia,et al.  Automated feature detection in digital images of skin. , 1991, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[13]  R. H. Morgan,et al.  Decision processes and observer error in the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis by chest roentgenography. , 1973, The American journal of roentgenology, radium therapy, and nuclear medicine.

[14]  D A Perednia,et al.  Localization of cutaneous lesions in digital images. , 1989, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[15]  A P Dhawan An expert system for the early detection of melanoma using knowledge-based image analysis. , 1988, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[16]  W V Stoecker,et al.  Skin cancer recognition by computer vision. , 1989, Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society.

[17]  Kundel Hl,et al.  Visual perception and image display terminals , 1986 .

[18]  M. G. Cook,et al.  Accuracy in clinically evaluating pigmented lesions. , 1989, BMJ.

[19]  D. Perednia,et al.  What dermatologists should know about digital imaging. , 1991, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.