ArticleScientific reports2026
The influence of structured reporting on the accuracy of head and neck sonographies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of structured reports (SR) has been shown to improve report completeness, time efficiency and interrater reliability in head and neck sonography (HNS). However, no data exists to date on the influence on report accuracy in terms of correct interpretation of findings. The aim of this study was to evaluate report accuracy as well as completeness using SR and free text reports (FTR). 128 participants of certified HNS courses were randomly assigned to create either SRs or FTR of predefined clinical cases. Demographic data, clinical training level and ultrasound experience of participants were documented prior to randomization. Each case included ultrasound images and clinical histories representing typical pathologies in HNS. Reports were independently evaluated by DEGUM-certified otorhinolaryngologists using standardized templates with respect to accuracy and completeness. SR demonstrated significantly higher accuracy (p < 0.001) as well as completeness (p < 0.001) compared to FTR. A strong positive correlation was found between completeness and accuracy using SR (r = 0.30, p < 0.01) only. Additionally, use of SR was the only significant predictor of improved report accuracy (p < 0.01) and completeness (p < 0.01). Structured reporting significantly improves both completeness and accuracy in head and neck ultrasound reports. The use of SR may contribute to more consistent reporting quality in clinical and educational settings.
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.