Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11452/25500
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorUsubütün, Alp-
dc.contributor.authorMutter, George L.-
dc.contributor.authorSağlam, Arzu-
dc.contributor.authorDolgun, Anıl-
dc.contributor.authorÖzkan, Eylem Akar-
dc.contributor.authorİnce, Tan-
dc.contributor.authorAkyol, Aytekin-
dc.contributor.authorBülbül, H. Dilek-
dc.contributor.authorÇalay, Zerrin-
dc.contributor.authorEren, Funda-
dc.contributor.authorGümürdulu, Derya-
dc.contributor.authorHaberal, A. Nihan-
dc.contributor.authorİlvan, Şennur-
dc.contributor.authorKaraveli, Şeyda-
dc.contributor.authorKoyuncuoğlu, Meral-
dc.contributor.authorMuezzinoğlu, Bahar-
dc.contributor.authorMüftuoğlu, Kamil H.-
dc.contributor.authorÖzdemir, Necmettin-
dc.contributor.authorÖzen, Özlem-
dc.contributor.authorPeştereli, Elif-
dc.contributor.authorUlukuş, Emine Çağnur-
dc.contributor.authorZekioğlu, Osman-
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-01T06:38:18Z-
dc.date.available2022-04-01T06:38:18Z-
dc.date.issued2012-06-
dc.identifier.citationUsubütün, A. vd. (2012). "Reproducibility of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis is good, but influenced by the diagnostic style of pathologists". Modern Pathology, 25(6), 877-884.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0893-3952-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2011.220-
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.nature.com/articles/modpathol2011220-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11452/25500-
dc.description.abstractEndometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) applies specific diagnostic criteria to designate a monoclonal endometrial preinvasive glandular proliferation known from previous studies to confer a 45-fold increased risk for endometrial cancer. In this international study we estimate accuracy and precision of EIN diagnosis among 20 reviewing pathologists in different practice environments, and with differing levels of experience and training. Sixty-two endometrial biopsies diagnosed as benign, EIN, or adenocarcinoma by consensus of two expert subspecialty pathologists were used as a reference comparison to assess diagnostic accuracy of 20 reviewing pathologists. Interobserver reproducibility among the 20 reviewers provided a measure of diagnostic precision. Before evaluating cases, observers were self-trained by reviewing published textbook and/or online EIN diagnostic guidelines. Demographics of the reviewing pathologists, and their impressions regarding implementation of EIN terminology were recorded. Seventy-nine percent of the 20 reviewing pathologists' diagnoses were exactly concordant with the expert consensus (accuracy). The interobserver weighted kappa values of 3-class EIN scheme (benign, EIN, carcinoma) diagnoses between expert consensus and each of reviewing pathologists averaged 0.72 (reproducibility, or precision). Reviewing pathologists demonstrated one of three diagnostic styles, which varied in the repertoire of diagnoses commonly used, and their nonrandom response to potentially confounding diagnostic features such as endometrial polyp, altered differentiation, background hormonal effects, and technically poor preparations. EIN diagnostic strategies can be learned and implemented from standard teaching materials with a high degree of reproducibility, but is impacted by the personal diagnostic style of each pathologist in responding to potential diagnostic confounders.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringernatureen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.rightsAtıf Gayri Ticari Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararasıtr_TR
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectPathologyen_US
dc.subjectEndometrial hyperplasiaen_US
dc.subjectEndometrial intraepithelial neoplasiaen_US
dc.subjectReproducibilityen_US
dc.subjectLong-termen_US
dc.subjectHyperplasiaen_US
dc.subjectPredictionen_US
dc.subjectClassificationen_US
dc.subjectPrecancersen_US
dc.subjectCanceren_US
dc.subjectHistopathologyen_US
dc.subjectMorphometryen_US
dc.subjectCarcinomaen_US
dc.subjectDiseaseen_US
dc.subject.meshAdenocarcinomaen_US
dc.subject.meshBiopsyen_US
dc.subject.meshCarcinoma in situen_US
dc.subject.meshCluster analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshEndometrial neoplasmsen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshGuideline adherenceen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshObserver variationen_US
dc.subject.meshPathology, clinicalen_US
dc.subject.meshPractice guidelines as topicen_US
dc.subject.meshPredictive value of testsen_US
dc.subject.meshQuality indicators, health careen_US
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of resultsen_US
dc.subject.meshTerminology as topicen_US
dc.subject.meshTurkeyen_US
dc.subject.meshUnited statesen_US
dc.subject.meshWorkplaceen_US
dc.titleReproducibility of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis is good, but influenced by the diagnostic style of pathologistsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.wos000304839300012tr_TR
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84861847901tr_TR
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergitr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentUludağ Üniversitesi/Tıp Fakültesi/Patoloji Anabilim Dalı.tr_TR
dc.identifier.startpage877tr_TR
dc.identifier.endpage884tr_TR
dc.identifier.volume25tr_TR
dc.identifier.issue6tr_TR
dc.relation.journalModern Pathologyen_US
dc.contributor.buuauthorBaykara, Sema-
dc.relation.collaborationYurt içitr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationYurt dışıtr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationSanayitr_TR
dc.identifier.pubmed22301705tr_TR
dc.subject.wosPathologyen_US
dc.indexed.wosSCIEen_US
dc.indexed.scopusScopusen_US
dc.indexed.pubmedPubMeden_US
dc.wos.quartileQ1en_US
dc.contributor.scopusid54945413500tr_TR
dc.subject.scopusEndometrial Hyperplasia; Progestins; Levonorgestrelen_US
dc.subject.emtreeArticleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeCancer diagnosisen_US
dc.subject.emtreeClinical articleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeConsensusen_US
dc.subject.emtreeDemographyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeDiagnostic accuracyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeEndometrial intraepithelial neoplasiaen_US
dc.subject.emtreeEndometrium biopsyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeEndometrium canceren_US
dc.subject.emtreeEndometrium carcinomaen_US
dc.subject.emtreeEndometrium polypen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHumanen_US
dc.subject.emtreeInterrater reliabilityen_US
dc.subject.emtreePriority journalen_US
dc.subject.emtreeProfessional practiceen_US
dc.subject.emtreeReproducibilityen_US
Appears in Collections:Scopus
Web of Science

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Baykara_vd_2012.pdf507.99 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons