Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25779591›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2015

The ESR Patient Advisory Group (ESR-PAG).

European Society of Radiology (ESR)

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. ESR concept paper on value-based radiology.Insights into imaging · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

European Society of Radiology (ESR)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe European Society of Radiology (ESR) Patient Advisory Group addresses the issue of communication among radiologists, radiographers and their patients. Initiated in 2013, the group represents many patient groups, working together with the ESR to raise awareness of medical imaging amongst patients, improve patient knowledge about imaging procedures, liaise on policy issues of common interest, involve patient representatives in strategic decisions regarding medical imaging and ensure that a patient-centred, "human" approach is embedded in the structure of the ESR. The ESR strongly believes that close collaboration with patient organisations is beneficial for both stakeholders, helping radiologists to understand patients' needs, to adapt their practice accordingly and to improve their communication skills. These factors are important to help radiologists find acknowledgement as clinicians and overcome the specialty's poor visibility. Close collaboration with professionals will allow patients to obtain a better understanding of the work of everyone involved in a radiological department, of the advantages and limitations of imaging, and what to expect from a radiological examination or an imaging-guided interventional procedure. Thus, this collaborative effort is not simply limited to improving patient satisfaction; the ultimate goal is to enhance the faith and trust that patients place in the medical imaging profession and all the radiology professionals involved. MAIN MESSAGES: • Good communication between patient and doctor is important for proper patient care. • The ESR Patient Advisory Group specifically addresses this communication issue. • The activities aim at developing a reciprocal relationship between radiologists/radiographers and patients. • Both radiologists/radiographers and patients need to be "educated" to improve communication.

Identifiers

PMID25779591
PMCPMC4376811
OpenAlexW4212963683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.