ArticleInsights into imaging2021
Patient survey of value in relation to radiology: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) value-based radiology subcommittee.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patients' Experience to MRI Examinations-A Systematic Qualitative Review With Meta-Synthesis.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of the clinical role of interventional radiologists: results of the CLINTERVENTIONAL randomized controlled trial.European radiology · 2025Trial
- Review
- ESUR consensus MRI for endometriosis: indications, reporting, and classifications.European radiology · 2025Article
- Feedback in radiology: Essential tool for improving user experience and providing value-based care.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Guidelines and recommendations for radiologist staffing, education and training.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- CLINTERVENTIONAL protocol: a randomized controlled trial to evaluate clinical consultations and audiovisual tools for interventional radiology.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Optimizing radiography education: Adapting curricula to evolving clinical practices in UAE healthcare.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Article
- Irish general practitioner (GP) perspectives on impact of direct access radiology on patient care in the community: results from a mixed-methods study.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Article
- Translating radiological research into practice-from discovery to clinical impact.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Psychosocial factors contributing to value creation in value-based healthcare: a scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Article
- The role of radiologist in the changing world of healthcare: a White Paper of the European Society of Radiology (ESR).Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- Value-based radiology: what is the ESR doing, and what should we do in the future?Insights into imaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationale and methodologyA survey of patients was carried out between January and June 2019, to better understand how patients interpret value in relation to radiology as a means to refining the concept of Value-Based Radiology (VBR) in Europe, ensure radiology's value is properly weighted in Value-Based Health Care (VBH) metrics, and maximise the value of radiological services to patients. The survey was disseminated via various heads of radiology departments, ESR officers, patient organisations, and ESR website and social media channels.
resultsResponses were received from 400 patients from 22 countries. Whilst most expressed general satisfaction with the radiological services they received, certain aspects of the radiological services they received left room for improvement. Thirty-six percent of respondents reported that they were not satisfied with the information provided about the risks and benefits of procedures, and thirty-three percent reported not being satisfied with the availability of radiologists for consultation, potentially suggesting that some patients lack sufficient information to participate fully in treatment decisions. Patients were often unaware of what information they were entitled to receive. Over eighty percent of respondents were unfamiliar with the concepts of Value-Based Radiology and/or Value-Based Health Care.
conclusionIn addition to procedural correctness (correct diagnosis, appropriate procedures performed), patients highly value information and communication with their radiologist (information provided about procedures, explanation of results, personal consultation). Lack of communication was found to be a cause of dissatisfaction in many cases. This could suggest a means of improving patient outcomes as measured by Value-Based Health Care metrics.
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.