143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14746785)
61. Survey of hospital clinicians' preferences regarding the format of radiology reports.
Plumb AA; Grieve FM; Khan SH
Clin Radiol; 2009 Apr; 64(4):386-94; 395-6. PubMed ID: 19264183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. Routine editing of trainee-generated radiology reports: effect on style quality.
Coakley FV; Heinze SB; Shadbolt CL; Schwartz LH; Ginsberg MS; Lefkowitz RA; Hilton S; Conlon K; Leibel S; Tumbull A; Panicek DM
Acad Radiol; 2003 Mar; 10(3):289-94. PubMed ID: 12643556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Improving accuracy in reporting CT scans of oncology patients: assessing the effect of education and feedback interventions on the application of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria.
Andoh H; McNulty NJ; Lewis PJ
Acad Radiol; 2013 Mar; 20(3):351-7. PubMed ID: 23452481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Discrepancy rates of on-call radiology residents' interpretations of CT angiography studies of the neck and circle of Willis.
Meyer RE; Nickerson JP; Burbank HN; Alsofrom GF; Linnell GJ; Filippi CG
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Aug; 193(2):527-32. PubMed ID: 19620452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. An evaluation of radiographer performed and interpreted barium swallows and meals.
Judson EE; Nightingale JM
Clin Radiol; 2009 Aug; 64(8):807-14. PubMed ID: 19589420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Comparing the accuracy of initial head CT reporting by radiologists, radiology trainees, neuroradiographers and emergency doctors.
Gallagher FA; Tay KY; Vowler SL; Szutowicz H; Cross JJ; McAuley DJ; Antoun NM
Br J Radiol; 2011 Nov; 84(1007):1040-5. PubMed ID: 22011832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Accuracy of medical staff assessment of trainees' operative performance.
Paisley AM; Baldwin PJ; Paterson-Brown S
Med Teach; 2005 Nov; 27(7):634-8. PubMed ID: 16332557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. 'Out of hours' adult CT head interpretation by senior emergency department staff following an intensive teaching session: a prospective blinded pilot study of 405 patients.
Jamal K; Mandel L; Jamal L; Gilani S
Emerg Med J; 2014 Jun; 31(6):467-70. PubMed ID: 23576233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Patients' attitudes towards trainee surgeons performing cataract surgery at a teaching hospital.
Moodie JJ; Masood I; Tint N; Rubinstein M; Vernon SA
Eye (Lond); 2008 Sep; 22(9):1183-6. PubMed ID: 17525769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. A novel approach to improving the interpretation of CT brain in trauma.
Evans LR; Fitzgerald MC; Varma D; Mitra B
Injury; 2018 Jan; 49(1):56-61. PubMed ID: 28882376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Modeling false positive error making patterns in radiology trainees for improved mammography education.
Zhang J; Silber JI; Mazurowski MA
J Biomed Inform; 2015 Apr; 54():50-7. PubMed ID: 25640462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Clinical impact of radiograph misinterpretation in a pediatric ED and the effect of physician training level.
Walsh-Kelly CM; Melzer-Lange MD; Hennes HM; Lye P; Hegenbarth M; Sty J; Starshak R
Am J Emerg Med; 1995 May; 13(3):262-4. PubMed ID: 7755814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. Plain abdominal radiographs: can we interpret them?
Lim CB; Chen V; Barsam A; Berger J; Harrison RA
Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2006 Jan; 88(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 16460633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. Radiological error--an early assessment of departmental radiology discrepancy meetings.
Driscoll DO; Halpenny D; Guiney M
Ir Med J; 2012 Jun; 105(6):172-4. PubMed ID: 22973653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. The misinterpretation rates of radiology residents on emergent neuroradiology magnetic resonance (MR) angiogram studies: correlation with level of residency training.
Filippi CG; Meyer RE; Cauley K; Nickerson JP; Burbank HN; Johnson JM; Linnell GJ; Alsofrom GF
Emerg Radiol; 2010 Jan; 17(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 19499257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. Common Resident Errors When Interpreting Computed Tomography of the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Review of Types, Pitfalls, and Strategies for Improvement.
Wildman-Tobriner B; Allen BC; Maxfield CM
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2019 Jan; 48(1):4-9. PubMed ID: 29397268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. The influence of clinical information on the reporting of CT by radiologists.
Leslie A; Jones AJ; Goddard PR
Br J Radiol; 2000 Oct; 73(874):1052-5. PubMed ID: 11271897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Around-the-clock attending radiology coverage is essential to avoid mistakes in the care of trauma patients.
Velmahos GC; Fili C; Vassiliu P; Nicolaou N; Radin R; Wilcox A
Am Surg; 2001 Dec; 67(12):1175-7. PubMed ID: 11768824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. MDCT of the abdomen: common misdiagnoses at a busy academic center.
Horton KM; Johnson PT; Fishman EK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Mar; 194(3):660-7. PubMed ID: 20173142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Radiographers are valuable contributors in interpreting computed tomography colonography.
Thomsen H; Egelund M; Strozik JE; Vuust M
Dan Med J; 2016 Feb; 63(2):. PubMed ID: 26836797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
