Login / Signup

What factors influence cellular pathologists' confidence in case reporting?

Harriet EvansPeter K KimaniLouise HillerYee Wah TsangShatrughan SahKishore GopalakrishnanClinton BoydMaurice B LoughreyPaul J KellyDavid P BoyleDavid ClarkIan O EllisMohammad IlyasEmad RakhaAdam BickersIan S D RobertsMaria F SoaresDesley A H NeilJanet A DunnAyesha AzamDavid Snead
Published in: Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology (2024)
Histopathology is a challenging interpretive discipline, and the level of confidence a pathologist has in their diagnosis is known to vary, which is conveyed descriptively in pathology reports. There has been little study to accurately quantify pathologists' diagnostic confidence or the factors that influence it. In this study involving sixteen pathologists from six NHS trusts, we assessed diagnostic confidence across multiple variables and four specialties. Each case was reported by four pathologists, with each pathologist reporting each case twice (on light microscopy (LM) and digital pathology (DP)). For each diagnosis, pathologists recorded their confidence on a 7-point Likert scale. This provided 16,187 diagnoses and associated confidence scores for analysis. All variables investigated were found to be significantly predictive of diagnostic confidence, except level of pathologist experience. Confidence was lower for difficult to report cases, cases where there was inter- and intra-pathologist variation in the diagnosis, and cases where the pathologist made an incorrect diagnosis. Confidence was higher, although nominally, for LM diagnoses than DP (rate ratio 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.18), p = 0.035), although results indicate pathologists are confident to report on DP. Lowest confidence scores were seen in areas of known diagnostic complexity and cases with quality issues. High confidence in incorrect diagnoses were almost invariably attributed to interpretive diagnostic differences which occurred across both rare and common lesions. The results highlight the value of external quality control schemes and the benefits of selective peer review when reporting.
Keyphrases
  • emergency department