Visual bias could impede diagnostic accuracy of breast cancer calcifications.

Purpose: Diagnosing breast cancer based on the distribution of calcifications is a visual task and thus prone to visual biases. We tested whether a recently discovered visual bias that has implications for breast cancer diagnosis would be present in expert radiologists, thereby validating the concern of this bias for accurate diagnoses. Approach: We ran a vision experiment with expert radiologists and untrained observers to test the presence of visual bias when judging the spread of dots that resembled calcifications and when judging the spread of line orientations. We calculated visual bias scores for both groups for both tasks. Results: Participants overestimated the spread of the dots and the spread of the line orientations. This bias, referred to as the variability overestimation effect, was of similar magnitudes in both expert radiologists and untrained observers. Even though the radiologists were better at both tasks, they were similarly biased compared with the untrained observers. Conclusions: The results justify the concern of the variability overestimation effect for accurate diagnoses based on breast calcifications. Specifically, the bias is likely to lead to an increased number of false-negative results, thereby leading to delayed treatments.

Multicenter Evaluation of Multiparametric MRI Clear Cell Likelihood Scores in Solid Indeterminate Small Renal Masses.

Background Solid small renal masses (SRMs) (≤4 cm) represent benign and malignant tumors. Among SRMs, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is frequently aggressive. When compared with invasive percutaneous biopsies, the objective of the proposed clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) is to classify ccRCC noninvasively by using multiparametric MRI, but it lacks external validation. Purpose To evaluate the performance of and interobserver agreement for ccLS to diagnose ccRCC among solid SRMs. Materials and Methods This retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study included patients with consecutive solid (≥25% approximate volume enhancement) SRMs undergoing multiparametric MRI between December 2012 and December 2019 at five academic medical centers with histologic confirmation of diagnosis. Masses with macroscopic fat were excluded. After a 1.5-hour training session, two abdominal radiologists per center independently rendered a ccLS for 50 masses. The diagnostic performance for ccRCC was calculated using random-effects logistic regression modeling. The distribution of ccRCC by ccLS was tabulated. Interobserver agreement for ccLS was evaluated with the Fleiss κ statistic. Results A total of 241 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 13 [SD]; 174 men) with 250 solid SRMs were evaluated. The mean size was 25 mm ± 8 (range, 10-39 mm). Of the 250 SRMs, 119 (48%) were ccRCC. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of ccRCC when ccLS was 4 or higher were 75% (95% CI: 68, 81), 78% (72, 84), and 76% (69, 81), respectively. The negative predictive value of a ccLS of 2 or lower was 88% (95% CI: 81, 93). The percentages of ccRCC according to the ccLS were 6% (range, 0%-18%), 38% (range, 0%-100%), 32% (range, 60%-83%), 72% (range, 40%-88%), and 81% (range, 73%-100%) for ccLSs of 1-5, respectively. The mean interobserver agreement was moderate (κ = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.75). Conclusion The clear cell likelihood score applied to multiparametric MRI had moderate interobserver agreement and differentiated clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other solid renal masses, with a negative predictive value of 88%. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mileto and Potretzke in this issue.

The Current State of Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment in the Radiology Workplace: A Survey.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were (1) to determine the extent to which gender discrimination and sexual harassment are experienced by female radiologists and trainees; (2) to examine whether experiencing harassment or discrimination influences perceptions of gender parity; and (3) to explore whether the existence of either formal institutional policies or the number of women in the workplace and/or in leadership positions influences perceptions of having achieved gender equity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online anonymous questionnaire, developed through an Association of University Radiologists (AUR) - affiliated 2019-2020 Task Force, was used to assess participant demographics, perceptions of gender parity, and experiences of gender discrimination and sexual harassment. RESULTS: A total of 375 complete responses were collected. All respondents were female with most practices consisting of fewer than 25% female radiologists. The majority of respondents reported having been a victim of sexual harassment (n = 226, 60.3%) and gender discrimination (n = 318, 84.8%) in the workplace. Approximately 87.5% of participants believed workplace gender parity would take longer than 10 years to achieve; 26.9% responded that it will never happen. Experiencing gender discrimination or harassment in the workplace was significantly associated with a negative outlook on achieving gender parity. Conversely, the presence and number of adequate formal institutional policies to address workplace gender equity and harassment were significantly associated with optimistic views on achieving gender parity. Higher percentages of women in one's practice as well as number of women in leadership positions were also significantly associated with more optimistic expectations. CONCLUSION: Gender discrimination and sexual harassment are common in the field of radiology and influence victims' outlook on achieving gender parity in the workplace. Perceptions can be improved by implementing adequate institutional training policies on harassment and increasing the representation of female radiologists.

You Too? Female Radiologists' Narratives on Discrimination and Harassment.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of examples of gender discrimination and sexual harassment in radiology. This lack of knowledge can limit radiologists' ability to relate to this topic, acknowledge its importance and impact, and take actions toward improvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a qualitative analysis using the model of thematic analysis developed by Braun and Clarke of narrative responses to a survey on the topic of #MeToo, which was distributed to a social media group of female radiologists. RESULTS: In all, 575 anonymous survey responses from 3,265 social media group members were analyzed. Among these responses, the study team identified important themes with examples, including Victims and Perpetrators, Acts of Gender Discrimination, Inequalities, Sexual Harassment and Assault, and Microaggressions. CONCLUSION: The narratives provide relatable examples of gender discrimination and sexual harassment in radiology. These may spark discussions that raise awareness among radiologists and result in interventions geared toward improvement.

Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: A Pictorial Guide to Clinical Use.

Cystic renal masses are commonly encountered in clinical practice. In 2019, the Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, originally developed for CT, underwent a major revision to incorporate MRI and is referred to as the Bosniak Classification, version 2019. The proposed changes attempt to (a) define renal masses (ie, cystic tumors with less than 25% enhancing tissue) to which the classification should be applied; (b) emphasize specificity for diagnosis of cystic renal cancers, thereby decreasing the number of benign and indolent cystic masses that are unnecessarily treated or imaged further; (c) improve interobserver agreement by defining imaging features, terms, and classes of cystic renal masses; (d) reduce variation in reported malignancy rates for each of the Bosniak classes; (e) incorporate MRI and to some extent US; and (f) be applicable to all cystic renal masses encountered in clinical practice, including those that had been considered indeterminate with the original classification. The authors instruct how, using CT, MRI, and to some extent US, the revised classification can be applied, with representative clinical examples and images. Practical tips, pitfalls to avoid, and decision tree rules are included to help radiologists and other physicians apply the Bosniak Classification, version 2019 and better manage cystic renal masses. An online resource and mobile application are also available for clinical assistance. An invited commentary by Siegel and Cohan is available online. ©RSNA, 2021.

Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, version 2019: interpretation pitfalls and recommendations to avoid misclassification.

The purpose of this review is to describe the potential sources of variability or discrepancy in interpretation of cystic renal masses under the Bosniak v2019 classification system. Strategies to avoid these pitfalls and clinical examples of diagnostic approaches are also presented. Potential pitfalls in the application of Bosniak v2019 are divided into three categories: interpretative, technical, and mass related. An organized, comprehensive review of possible discrepancies in interpreting Bosniak v2019 cystic masses is presented with pictorial examples of difficult clinical cases and proposed solutions. The scheme provided can guide readers to consistent, precise application of the classification system. Radiologists should be aware of the possible sources of misinterpretation of cystic renal masses when applying Bosniak v2019. Knowing which features and types of cystic masses are prone to interpretive errors, in addition to the inherent trade-offs between the CT and MR techniques used to characterize them, can help radiologists avoid these pitfalls.

Radiology, Sexual Harassment, and the #MeToo Movement.

The rise of the #MeToo movement has sparked renewed conversations about sexual harassment in the workplace. All medical fields, including radiology, can benefit from reflecting on workplace culture, reviewing policies, and committing to change. This review provides an overview of the #MeToo movement, describes the prevalence of sexual harassment in medicine and radiology, summarizes barriers to reporting incidents of sexual harassment, evaluates the backlash to the #MeToo movement, and discusses policies and procedures to aid in preventing sexual harassment in the #MeToo era.