Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742332›Full record

ArticleJournal of digital imaging2021

Radiology Reporting in the Era of Patient-Centered Care: How Can We Improve Readability?

Siya Patil, Joseph H Yacoub, Xue Geng, Susan M Ascher, Ross W Filice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Generating colloquial radiology reports with large language models.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Siya PatilGeorgetown University School of Medicine, 3900 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Joseph H YacoubDepartment of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, 3900 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Xue GengDepartment of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics and Biomathematics, Georgetown University Medical Center, 3900 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Susan M AscherDepartment of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, 3900 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Ross W FiliceDepartment of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, 3900 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington DC, 20007, USA. ross.w.filice@gunet.georgetown.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1142-3338

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiology reports are consumed not only by referring physicians and healthcare providers, but also by patients. We assessed report readability in our enterprise and implemented a two-part quality improvement intervention with the goal of improving report accessibility. A total of 491,813 radiology reports from ten hospitals within the enterprise from May to October, 2018 were collected. We excluded echocardiograms, rehabilitation reports, administrator reports, and reports with negative scores leaving 461,219 reports and report impressions for analysis. A grade level (GL) was calculated for each report and impression by averaging four readability metrics. Next, we conducted a readability workshop and distributed weekly emails with readability GLs over a period of 6 months to each attending radiologist at our primary institution. Following this intervention, we utilized the same exclusion criteria and analyzed 473,612 reports from May to October, 2019. The mean GL for all reports and report impressions was above 13 at every hospital in the enterprise. Following our intervention, a statistically significant drop in GL for reports and impressions was demonstrated at all locations, but a larger and significant improvement was observed in impressions at our primary site. Radiology reports across the enterprise are written at an advanced reading level making them difficult for patients and their families to understand. We observed a significantly larger drop in GL for impressions at our primary site than at all other sites following our intervention. Radiologists at our home institution improved their report readability after becoming more aware of their writing practices.

Indexed as

ComprehensionRadiologyHumansInternetPatient-Centered CareRadiographyRadiologistsPatient-centered careQuality improvementReadabilityReport

Identifiers

PMID33742332
PMCPMC8289949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.