ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2018
Structured reporting in petrous bone MRI examinations: impact on report completeness and quality.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structured reporting in radiology: a systematic review to explore its potential.European radiology · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of structured reporting on interpretability of PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer staging-towards standardised clinical implementation.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Reporting and data systems for laparoscopic cholecystectomy with findings of a user adoption survey.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Structured reporting of B-mode, color Doppler, and CEUS in testicular tumor assessment: a reader study with urologist ratings.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Structured reporting enhances diagnostic quality in periapical dental radiographs: a comparative evaluation.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of Structured Reporting of Lower Extremity CT Angiography on Report Quality and Workflow Efficiency.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Structured versus non-structured reporting of pelvic MRI for ileal pouch evaluation: clarity and effectiveness.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- [Integration of structured reporting into the routine radiological workflow].Der Radiologe · 2021Review
- Article
- The use of structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound ensures time-efficiency and report quality during residency.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate whether structured reports (SRs) provide benefits regarding the completeness and the clarity of reports, as well as regarding the satisfaction of the referring physicians compared to narrative freetext reports (NRs) of MRI examinations of the petrous bone.
methodsAfter sample size calculation, 32 patients with clinically indicated MRI examinations of the petrous bone were included in this retrospective study. The already existing NRs were taken from the radiologic information system. The corresponding SRs were retrospectively generated by two radiologists using an online-based application. All 64 reports (one NR and one SR per patient) were evaluated by two head and neck physicians using a questionnaire.
resultsWhile 41% of the SRs showed no missing report key feature, all NRs exhibited at least one missing key feature (p < 0.001). SRs achieved significantly higher satisfaction rates regarding the linguistic quality and overall report quality compared to NRs: Using a 6-point Likert scale (1 = insufficient to 6 = excellent), SRs were rated with a median value of 6 [interquartile range (IQR): 1] for linguistic as well as overall quality, and NRs were rated with a median of 5 (IQR: 0) for linguistic as well as overall quality (p < 0.001).
conclusionsStructured reporting of petrous bone MRI examinations may positively influence the completeness and quality of radiologic reports. Due to the easier readability and facilitation of information extraction, SRs improve the satisfaction level of the referring physicians.
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.