ArticleScientific reports2025
Digitalised multidisciplinary conferences effectively identify and prevent imaging-related medical error in intensive care patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Burnout, PTSD, and Medical Error: The Medico-Legal Implications of the Mental Health Crisis Among Frontline Healthcare Professionals During COVID-19.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to assess the effectiveness of digital multidisciplinary conferences (MDCs) in preventing imaging-related quality management (QM) events during the coronavirus-disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID-19 challenged interdisciplinary exchange and QM measures for patient safety. Regular MDCs between radiologists and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians, introduced in our hospital in 2018, enable re-evaluation of imaging examinations and bilateral feedback. MDC protocols from 2020 to 2021 were analysed regarding imaging-related QM events. Epidemiological data on COVID-19 were matched with MDCs. 333 MDCs including 1324 radiological examinations in 857 patients (median age = 64 (IQR = 55-73) years, 66.7% male) were analysed. MDCs were held within a median of 1 day after imaging (IQR = 1-3). QM events were identified in 2.7% (n = 36/1324) of examinations. This represented a significant decrease compared to a control group from 2018/2019 (QM events identified in 14.0%, p < 0.001). QM incidence remained consistent in the pandemic cohort (regression coefficient estimate = -0.01, 95% confidence interval = [0.000, 0.000], p = 0.68). 81% (n = 29/36) of QM events were report-related, 19% process-related (n = 6/36), and 2.8% indication-related (n = 1/36). In 7.3% (n = 97/1324) of examinations, the patient was affected by COVID-19. With MDCs as an effective feedback mechanism in place, the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic led to no increase in QM incidence. Notably, COVID status did not impact QM event occurrence.
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.