Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33871753›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2021

Understanding patient needs and gaps in radiology reports through online discussion forum analysis.

Mohammad Alarifi, Timothy Patrick, Abdulrahman Jabour, Min Wu, Jake Luo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. American College of Veterinary Radiology and European College of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging consensus statement on imaging report foundations.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2025
    Article
  12. Generating colloquial radiology reports with large language models.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Proposed Questions to Assess the Extent of Knowledge in Understanding the Radiology Report Language.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Mohammad AlarifiCollege of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, 53211, USA.
Timothy PatrickCollege of Engineering, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, 53211, USA.
Abdulrahman JabourHealth Informatics Department, Faculty of Public Health and Tropical Medicine at Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
Min WuCollege of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, 53211, USA.
Jake LuoCollege of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, 53211, USA. Jakeluo@uwm.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our objective is to investigate patient needs and understand information gaps in radiology reports using patient questions that were posted on online discussion forums. We leveraged online question and answer platforms to collect questions posted by patients to understand current gaps and patient needs. We retrieved six hundred fifty-nine (659) questions using the following sites: Yahoo Answers, Reddit.com, Quora, and Wiki Answers. The questions retrieved were analyzed and the major themes and topics were identified. The questions retrieved were classified into eight major themes. The themes were related to the following topics: radiology report, safety, price, preparation, procedure, meaning, medical staff, and patient portal. Among the 659 questions, 35.50% were concerned with the radiology report. The most common question topics in the radiology report focused on patient understanding of the radiology report (62 of 234 [26.49%]), image visualization (53 of 234 [22.64%]), and report representation (46 of 234 [19.65%]). We also found that most patients were concerned about understanding the MRI report (32%; n = 143) compared with the other imaging modalities (n = 434). Using online discussion forums, we discussed major unmet patient needs and information gaps in radiology reports. These issues could be improved to enhance radiology design in the future.

Indexed as

Online discussion forumsRadiologyRadiology notesRadiology reportSocial media

Identifiers

PMID33871753
PMCPMC8055745

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.