ArticleInsights into imaging2025
Feedback in radiology: Essential tool for improving user experience and providing value-based care.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between radiological CDSS availability and quality of imaging referrals graded using RI-RADS.iScience · 2026Article
- Determining the MRI Examination Experience: The Relationship Between Waiting Times, Information Provision, and Patient Anxiety.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Simulation-Based Diagnostic Stewardship Framework for Imaging Utilization in Primary Care: A Model Using 100 Common Clinical Conditions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measuring the value that radiology brings to patient care can be challenging. A positive patient experience is consistently associated with patient safety, clinical effectiveness, and outcome measures and is therefore a tool for measuring value-based care. Monitoring the experience of users of radiology services is an indispensable component of quality improvement programmes for radiology departments. The integration of comprehensive feedback mechanisms brings numerous benefits, including enhanced care, strengthened trust, and greater engagement with our stakeholders and service users. Feedback should be collected from a variety of stakeholders through a 360-degree approach, combining both systematically performed structured methods, such as formal surveys, and unstructured methods, such as informal and opportunistic information gathering during multidisciplinary rounds. To maximise the impact of feedback, it should be frequent and diverse, ensuring that all perspectives are considered. Leaders in radiology must prioritise embedding a culture of feedback within their institutions, recognising its crucial role in continuous improvement. It is essential to ensure that our departments consistently provide value to our most important stakeholders-the patients-but also to our referrers and trainees. In this article, we consider methods for collecting feedback and provide some of the key findings from the literature. By fostering an environment that values and acts upon feedback, we can achieve significant advancements in patient care and overall service quality in radiology. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Regular feedback from patients, peers, radiographers, referrers, trainees and other users of imaging services is an essential tool for continuous quality improvement, patient safety and value-based care, enhancing trust and greater engagement with our stakeholders and service users. KEY POINTS: Feedback from patients and referrers, radiographers and radiology trainees, helps radiology departments to identify weaknesses and strengths, and should be fully incorporated into daily practice. Many methods are available for collecting user and stakeholder experience, and these should be implemented as a priority. Acting on stakeholder feedback can improve patient safety and patient experience ratings, leading to a culture of continuous improvement in value-based care.
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.