ACR RADPEER Committee White Paper with 2016 Updates: Revised Scoring System, New Classifications, Self-Review, and Subspecialized Reports

Goldberg-Stein, Shlomit; Frigini, L. Alexandre; Long, Scott D.; Metwalli, Zeyad; Nguyen, Xuan V.; Parker, Mark S.; Abujudeh, Hani H.

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2017.03.023

Cited by 74 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This process reinforces a "just culture" of safety, quality, education, and accountability, and is intended to be educational, non-punitive, and positive [ 13 ]. The peer learning system meets the requirements for physician peer review stipulated by accrediting organizations and professional societies such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services [ 14 ], TJC [ 5 ], the ACR [ 4 , 15 ], and the American Board of Radiology [ 16 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Learning and Operationalizing During COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Virarkar¹,

Morani²,

Bhosale³

et al. 2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of the article is to describe the changes in managing the peer learning system in the Department of Abdominal Imaging at our institution during the pandemic and its restrictions. The pandemic poses diverse challenges to academic institutions across the country including radiology education and peer learning. The health sector in some areas of the country has been stretched by the number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. In March 2020, our institution cancelled all in-person conferences as per guidelines from the Center of Disease Control and Prevention to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and the conferences were shifted to virtual platforms. Our recent peer learning approach allowed us to practice appropriate social distancing while following the institutional and national guidelines with minimal disruption. Other institutions that are facing similar challenges can adopt or modify our framework of a successful and efficient virtual peer learning process.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Learning and Operationalizing During COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Virarkar¹,

Morani²,

Bhosale³

et al. 2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Errors were classified in accord with ACR guidelines, specifically as errors of perception, interpretation, and communication [7]. False positive perceptual errors occurred when normal findings are interpreted as pathologic.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diurnal variation of major error rates in the interpretation of abdominal/pelvic CT studies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale and objective Variation of visual selective attention through the day has been demonstrated in several arenas of human performance, including radiology. It is uncertain whether this variation translates to an identifiable diurnal pattern of error rates for radiology interpretation. The purpose of this study was to attempt to identify particular days of the week and times of the day when radiologists might be most prone to error. Materials and methods Abdomen/pelvis CT studies containing at least one major error were collected from a 10-year period from the quality assurance (QA) database at our institution. A major error was defined as a missed finding that had altered management in a way potentially detrimental to the patient. The identified studies were categorized by the day of the week and hour of the day that the study was interpreted. Study volume data over this same period was also obtained by day of the week and time of day, so to normalize the data based on case volume. Standard errors of the volume-adjusted error rates were obtained based on the binomial distribution. The null hypothesis of constant error rates over time was tested using a weighted logistic regression model with linear time as predictor. Results A total of 252 major errors were identified. More errors were made on Monday than on any other day of the week (n = 58). Major error rates increased through the mid to late morning (9 am to 12 pm), and then decreased progressively through the afternoon until 4 pm, when a rise in the error rate was seen. This pattern persisted when error rates were normalized by study volume within each hour. Overall tests of time-constancy of error rates by day and hour were statistically significant (both p-values < 0.001). ConclusionOur study shows that error rates in abdominal CT do seem to vary with time of day and day of the week. During the workweek, error rates were highest in the late morning and at the close of the workday, and greater on Mondays than other days.

show abstract

“…For scores 2 to 4, subheadings are (a) unlikely to be clinically significant and (b) likely to be clinically significant, considering clinically significant discrepancies those findings included in our list of critical findings (potentially life-threatening risk) and those which implicates a change in therapeutic or diagnostic behavior. Despite the 2016 modifications of the RADPEER scoring system to a 3-point scoring system [3], we considered that our modified 5-point scale was more suitable and necessary to the evaluation of radiologist in training, providing a more detailed level of analysis. We also consider the 5-point scale more suitable for Spanish translation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of an informatics tool to assess resident’s progress in developing reporting skills

Diaz

Ulla

2019

Insights Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Diagnostic radiology residency programs pursuits as main objectives of the development of diagnostic capabilities and written communication skills to answer clinicians’ questions of referring clinicians. There has been also an increasing focus on competencies, rather than just education inputs. Then, to show ongoing professional development is necessary for a system to assess and document resident’s competence in these areas. Therefore, we propose the implementation of an informatics tool to objectively assess resident’s progress in developing diagnostics and reporting skills. We expect to found decreased preliminary report-final report variability within the course of each year of the residency program. Results We analyzed 12,162 evaluations from 32 residents (8 residents per year in a 4-year residency program) in a 7-month period. 73.96% of these evaluations belong to 2nd-year residents. We chose two indicators to study the evolution of evaluations: the total of discrepancies over the total of preliminary reports (excluding score 0) and the total of likely to be clinically significant discrepancies (scores 2b, 3b, and 4b) over the total of preliminary reports (excluding score 0). With the analysis of these two indicators over the evaluations of 2nd-year residents, we found a slight decrease in the value of the first indicator and relative stable behavior of the second one. Conclusions This tool is useful for objective assessment of reporting skill of radiology residents. It can provide an opportunity for continuing medical education with case-based learning from those cases with clinically significant discrepancies between the preliminary and the final report.

show abstract

ACR RADPEER Committee White Paper with 2016 Updates: Revised Scoring System, New Classifications, Self-Review, and Subspecialized Reports

Cited by 74 publications

References 17 publications

Peer Learning and Operationalizing During COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Peer Learning and Operationalizing During COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Diurnal variation of major error rates in the interpretation of abdominal/pelvic CT studies

Validation of an informatics tool to assess resident’s progress in developing reporting skills

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About