Literature DB >> 17411786

A framework for improving radiology reporting.

Chris L Sistrom1, Curtis P Langlotz.   

Abstract

The interpretative reports rendered by radiologists are the only tangible manifestation of their expertise, training, and experience. These documents are very often the primary means by which radiologists provide patient care. Radiology reports are extremely variable in form, content, and quality. The authors propose a framework for conceptualizing the reporting process and how it might be improved. This consists of standard language, a structured format, and consistent content. These attributes will be realized by modifying the clinical reporting process, including the creation, storage, transmission, and review of interpretative documents. The authors also point out that changes in training and evaluation must be a part of the process, because they are complementary to purely technical solutions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 17411786     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.06.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  25 in total

1.  Adequacy of paediatric renal tract ultrasound requests and reports in a general radiology department.

Authors:  N Govender; S Andronikou; M D M Goodier
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2011-10-14

2.  Mapping LIDC, RadLex™, and lung nodule image features.

Authors:  Pia Opulencia; David S Channin; Daniela S Raicu; Jacob D Furst
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  An ontology for PACS integration.

Authors:  Charles E Kahn; David S Channin; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Variation in the documentation of findings in pediatric voiding cystourethrogram.

Authors:  Anthony J Schaeffer; Shreya Sood; Tanya Logvinenko; Graciela Rivera-Castro; Ilina Rosoklija; Jeanne S Chow; Caleb P Nelson
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-05-25

Review 5.  Current and future trends in imaging informatics for oncology.

Authors:  Mia A Levy; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

Review 6.  [Reporting initiatives. An update on treatment in radiology].

Authors:  J-M Hempel; D Pinto dos Santos; R Kloeckner; C Dueber; P Mildenberger
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  Structured report compliance: effect on audio dictation time, report length, and total radiologist study time.

Authors:  Tarek N Hanna; Haris Shekhani; Kiran Maddu; Chao Zhang; Zhengjia Chen; Jamlik-Omari Johnson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2016-06-25

8.  Usage of structured reporting in radiological practice: results from an Italian online survey.

Authors:  Lorenzo Faggioni; Francesca Coppola; Riccardo Ferrari; Emanuele Neri; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Role of Multiparametric MR Imaging in Malignancies of the Urogenital Tract.

Authors:  Alberto Diaz de Leon; Daniel Costa; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.266

10.  Radiological reports: a comparison between the transmission efficiency of information in free text and in structured reports.

Authors:  Flavio Barbosa; Lea Maria Zanini Maciel; Elizabeth Melmi Vieira; Paulo M de Azevedo Marques; Jorge Elias; Valdair Francisco Muglia
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.365

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.