Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39293649›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2024

Imaging Informatics Education in Clinical Informatics Programs: Perspective from Imaging and Clinical Informatics Professionals.

Nathan A Bumbarger, Alexander J Towbin, Pamela Garcia-Filion, James Whitfill, Tessa Cook, Les R Folio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Nathan A BumbargerDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Alexander J TowbinDepartment of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States; University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States.
Pamela Garcia-FilionDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Arizona College of Medicine Tucson, Tucson, Arizona, United States.
James WhitfillDepartment of Internal Medicine and Biomedical Informatics, The University of Arizona College of Medicine Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona, United States.
Tessa CookDepartment of Medicine, Diagnostic Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Les R FolioDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImaging and Clinical Informatics are domains of biomedical informatics. Imaging Informatics topics are often not covered in depth in most Clinical Informatics fellowships. While dedicated Imaging Informatics fellowships exist, they may not have the same rigor as ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) accredited Clinical Informatics fellowships and they do not provide a direct path toward subspecialty board certification.

objectivesWe compared published curricula and test content between Clinical and Imaging Informatics fellowship programs. We then highlighted differences between training programs and identified overlapping topics and opportunities for additional education for each type of trainee.

methodsPublished consensus curricula and topics were extracted for each specialty. Two informaticists compared topics as shared or not shared between specialties. Next, test content outlines were compared for each specialty exam, extracted, and classified as shared or not shared content. A Venn diagram was created to highlight areas unique to each specialty as well as areas of overlap.

resultsThere were 139 Clinical Informatics topics compared with 97 Imaging Informatics topics. Of the 139 Clinical Informatics topics, 115 (83%) were covered in the Imaging Informatics curriculum. Of the 97 Imaging Informatics topics, 74 (76%) were covered in the Clinical Informatics curriculum. When using test content outline data, 170 out of 397 (43%) Imaging Informatics topics matched to 64 out of 139 (46%) Clinical Informatics topics. We describe examples of overlapping topics and those unique to each program to identify potential areas to expand.

conclusionImaging Informatics and Clinical Informatics fellowship programs have some overlap with areas unique to each. Our review may help guide those seeking informatics education and potential certification. As enterprise imaging evolves, these differences may become more important and create knowledge gaps, if not systematically evaluated.

Indexed as

CurriculumMedical InformaticsDiagnostic ImagingHumans

Identifiers

PMID39293649
PMCPMC11410437

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.