Literature DB >> 17522346

Technology assessment in radiology: putting the evidence in evidence-based radiology.

William Hollingworth1, Jeffrey G Jarvik.   

Abstract

In this review, which is part of a larger series on evidence-based practice in radiology, the relationship between technology assessment (TA) and the practice of evidence-based radiology (EBR) is discussed. TA guides researchers in the methods required to be reliable providers of unbiased and relevant evidence. Meanwhile, EBR equips radiologists with the skills needed to be discerning consumers of that evidence. Both paradigms aim to improve the effectiveness of health care spending. In this review, it is argued that EBR can be only as good as the TA on which it is based. However, TA is particularly complex in regard to diagnostic radiology because of the many links in the chain between the interim objective (to make the correct diagnosis) and the ultimate goal (to improve patient health). In this article, the development of TA in medicine in general and, more specifically, the TA hierarchy for the evaluation of diagnostic imaging are described. Some of the improvements in the pool of evidence during the past 30 years are documented, and some of the remaining tensions between TA and EBR are highlighted. (c) RSNA, 2007.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17522346     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2441051790

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  9 in total

1.  Health technology assessment: principles, methods and current status.

Authors:  A Giovagnoni; L Bartolucci; A Manna; J Morbiducci; G Ascoli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Evidence-based radiology: why and how?

Authors:  Francesco Sardanelli; Myriam G Hunink; Fiona J Gilbert; Giovanni Di Leo; Gabriel P Krestin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Does MR perfusion imaging impact management decisions for patients with brain tumors? A prospective study.

Authors:  C P Geer; J Simonds; A Anvery; M Y Chen; J H Burdette; M E Zapadka; T L Ellis; S B Tatter; G J Lesser; M D Chan; K P McMullen; A J Johnson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Surveillance magnetic resonance imaging for isolated optic pathway gliomas: is gadolinium necessary?

Authors:  Ezekiel Maloney; A Luana Stanescu; Francisco A Perez; Ramesh S Iyer; Randolph K Otto; Sarah Leary; Lotte Steuten; Amanda I Phipps; Dennis W W Shaw
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-05-22

5.  Resting-state spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity: a new paradigm for presurgical planning using fMRI.

Authors:  Joshua S Shimony; Dongyang Zhang; James M Johnston; Michael D Fox; Abhik Roy; Eric C Leuthardt
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Developing a Curriculum for Information and Communications Technology Use in Global Health Research and Training: A Qualitative Study Among Chinese Health Sciences Graduate Students.

Authors:  Zhenyu Ma; Li Yang; Lan Yang; Kaiyong Huang; Hongping Yu; Huimin He; Jiaji Wang; Le Cai; Jie Wang; Hua Fu; Lisa Quintiliani; Robert H Friedman; Jian Xiao; Abu S Abdullah
Journal:  JMIR Med Educ       Date:  2017-06-12

7.  Comparison between CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for colonic evaluation in patients with renal insufficiency.

Authors:  Sun-Young Chung; Seong Ho Park; Seung Soo Lee; Ju Hee Lee; Ah Young Kim; Su-Kil Park; Duck Jong Han; Hyun Kwon Ha
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 3.500

8.  Teaching Critical Thinking in Graduate Medical Education: Lessons Learned in Diagnostic Radiology.

Authors:  Benjamin Morrissey; Marta E Heilbrun
Journal:  J Med Educ Curric Dev       Date:  2017-03-20

9.  Qualitative study to explore radiologist and radiologic technologist perceptions of outcomes patients experience during imaging in the USA.

Authors:  Monica Zigman Suchsland; Maria Jessica Cruz; Victoria Hardy; Jeffrey Jarvik; Gianna McMillan; Anne Brittain; Matthew Thompson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.