Literature DB >> 22038513

Influence of radiology report format on reading time and comprehension.

Elizabeth A Krupinski1, E Tyler Hall, Stacy Jaw, Bruce Reiner, Eliot Siegel.   

Abstract

This study examined whether radiology report format influences reading time and comprehension of information. Three reports were reformatted to conventional free text, structured text organized by organ system, and hierarchical structured text organized by clinical significance. Five attending radiologists, five radiology residents, five internal medicine attendings, and five internal medicine residents read the reports and answered a series of questions about them. Reading was timed and participants reported reading preferences. For reading time, there was no significant effect for format, but there was for attending versus resident, and radiology versus internal medicine. For percent correct scores, there was no significant effect for report format or for attending versus resident, but there was for radiology versus internal medicine with the radiologists scoring better overall. Report format does not appear to impact viewing time or percent correct answers, but there are differences in both for specialty and level of experience. There were also differences between the four groups of participants with respect to what they focus on in a radiology report and how they read reports (skim versus read in detail). There may not be a "one-size-fits-all" radiology report format as individual preferences differ widely.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22038513      PMCID: PMC3264711          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-011-9424-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  23 in total

1.  Radiological report: expectations of clinicians.

Authors:  Nurullah Doğan; Zeynep Nigar Varlibaş; Ozge Petek Erpolat
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2010-07-27       Impact factor: 2.630

2.  Radiology interpretation process modeling.

Authors:  Rita Noumeir
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2005-08-29       Impact factor: 6.317

3.  Benefits of the DICOM structured report.

Authors:  Rita Noumeir
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 4.  Radiology reporting, past, present, and future: the radiologist's perspective.

Authors:  Bruce I Reiner; Nancy Knight; Eliot L Siegel
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 5.532

5.  Survey of hospital clinicians' preferences regarding the format of radiology reports.

Authors:  A A O Plumb; F M Grieve; S H Khan
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 2.350

6.  The radiology report of the future: the ignored impression.

Authors:  Mervyn D Cohen
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  Structured reporting: coronary CT angiography: a white paper from the American College of Radiology and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Geoffrey D Rubin; Shawn D Teague; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard; Paul A Larson
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  The radiology report of the future: a summary of the 2007 Intersociety Conference.

Authors:  N Reed Dunnick; Curtis P Langlotz
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 5.532

9.  Radiology report turnaround: expectations and solutions.

Authors:  G W L Boland; A S Guimaraes; P R Mueller
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-03-08       Impact factor: 7.034

10.  How do referring clinicians want radiologists to report? Suggestions from the COVER survey.

Authors:  Jan M L Bosmans; Lieve Peremans; Arthur M De Schepper; Philippe O Duyck; Paul M Parizel
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2011-07-29
View more
  6 in total

1.  Natural Language Processing in Dutch Free Text Radiology Reports: Challenges in a Small Language Area Staging Pulmonary Oncology.

Authors:  J Martijn Nobel; Sander Puts; Frans C H Bakers; Simon G F Robben; André L A J Dekker
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Structured reports of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging in primary endometrial cancer: Potential benefits for clinical decision-making.

Authors:  Yi Liu; Zonghao Feng; Shengtang Qin; Jiejin Yang; Chao Han; Xiaoying Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Redefining the structure of structured reporting in radiology.

Authors:  J Martijn Nobel; Ellen M Kok; Simon G F Robben
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2020-02-04

Review 4.  Structured reporting in radiology: a systematic review to explore its potential.

Authors:  J Martijn Nobel; Koos van Geel; Simon G F Robben
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-10-15       Impact factor: 7.034

5.  Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time.

Authors:  Raphael Sexauer; Caroline Bestler
Journal:  J Imaging       Date:  2022-07-24

6.  Radiology report: what is the opinion of the referring physician?

Authors:  Fernando de Castro Guimarães Rios Ignácio; Luis Ronan Marquez Ferreira de Souza; Giuseppe D'Ippolito; Mayara Martins Garcia
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.