ArticleEuropean radiology2019
Direct communication between radiologists and patients following imaging examinations. Should radiologists rethink their patient care?
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Humor in radiological breast cancer screening: a way of improving patient service?Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Trial
- "I was seen by a radiologist, but unfortunately I can't remember the name and I still have questions. What should I do?" Radiologists should give thoughts to improve service professionalism and patient esteem.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2020Trial
- Psychological Impact of AI-Simplified Brain MRI Reports: A Randomized Trial of Patient Understanding, Anxiety, and Health Literacy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Medical illustrations in radiologic reports for endometriosis: improving communication with surgeons and patients.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Improving the oncology care pathway through the experience of patients and their caregiver.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Scanxiety: potential lessons for personalized radiology.European radiology · 2024Article
- How to prepare for a bright future of radiology in Europe.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- [Patient-centered radiology : What patients want from radiologists].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- [Sustainability and climate protection : Implications on patient-centered care in radiology].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Communicating with patients in the age of online portals-challenges and opportunities on the horizon for radiologists.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- Direct communication between radiologists and patients improves the quality of imaging reports.European radiology · 2021Article
- Designing a Consumer-Friendly Radiology Report using a Patient-Centered Approach.Journal of digital imaging · 2021Article
- Understanding patient needs and gaps in radiology reports through online discussion forum analysis.Insights into imaging · 2021Article
- Addressing intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: how radiologists can make a difference.European radiology · 2021Article
- Intimate partner violence crisis in the COVID-19 pandemic: how can radiologists make a difference?European radiology · 2020Article
- Patient complaints in radiology: 9-year experience at a European tertiary care center.European radiology · 2019Observational
- Clinicians' perceptions of the quality of outsourced radiology and actions taken around perceived imaging errors in practice.European radiology · 2019Article
- Article
- Striving to be of Value: Building a Virtual Radiology Consult Service for Patients.Current problems in diagnostic radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate patients' perception of the radiology service when the radiologist communicates the findings to patients.
methodsAfter routine MRI, patients in group 1 (n = 101) were given the opportunity to discuss the findings with the radiologist. Patients in group 2 (n = 101) left the radiology department without any personal communication. Subsequently, by means of a questionnaire designed by an expert psychologist, both groups were asked regarding their anxiety, emotional attachment to the institute and subjective assessment of competence.
resultsOverall 76 % of all patients were concerned about their imaging findings without significant difference between both groups (p = 0.179). Significantly more patients in group 1 (81%) versus group 2 (14%; p < 0.001) perceived the opportunity to discuss their imaging findings with a radiologist to be a characteristic of a good radiology consultation. A larger number of patients in group 1 experienced significantly higher bonding and only wanted in the future to be examined in the department with communication (p = 0.001) (93%/75%). Significantly more patients in group 1 regarded the radiology department they attended as being more competent (mean score 4.72/4.09, p < 0.001).
conclusionDirect communication of imaging findings from radiologists to patients after an MRI examination leads to increased confidence in the radiology service and higher bonding between the patient and radiologist. Radiologists who refrain from direct communication have a lower bonding to patients and are assessed to have lower competence from the patient's point of view. KEY POINTS: • Communication between radiologists and patients leads to an increased bonding affinity. • Direct communication leads to increased patient confidence in the radiology service. • Patients perceived discussion with a radiologist of high value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.