This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Andrei I. Vermont, MD
SUNY University Hospital Syracuse, NY

JAMA. 1997;277(8):628.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Drs Egglin and Feinstein¹ provided us with a new and commendable insight with regard to the way the diagnostic judgments of radiologists are modified by the perceptual context in which test results are presented to them. The method and arguments they presented in the article convinced me that our thought process in front of an imaging study follows Bayesian rules. The radiologists in their study appeared to use the early cases in the series they had to read as a "pilot" group: their concrete perceptions and influences were used to calibrate their readings for the rest of the cases in the series. We would like to believe that in our daily practice we also use pretest probability estimates. However, we infer the pretest probability from risk factors and the results of tests (clinical or otherwise) that are presented to us by a narrative of the clinical . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?