189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17411562)
1. Disagreement in interpretation: a method for the development of benchmarks for quality assurance in imaging.
Soffa DJ; Lewis RS; Sunshine JH; Bhargavan M
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Mar; 1(3):212-7. PubMed ID: 17411562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates.
Borgstede JP; Lewis RS; Bhargavan M; Sunshine JH
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Jan; 1(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 17411521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Quality--a radiology imperative: interpretation accuracy and pertinence.
Lee JK
J Am Coll Radiol; 2007 Mar; 4(3):162-5. PubMed ID: 17412256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A new concept in radiology QA in a large setting.
Tomlinson D; Stapleman K
Radiol Manage; 1998; 20(2):30-7. PubMed ID: 10179190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outsourced teleradiology imaging services: an analysis of discordant interpretation in 124,870 cases.
Wong WS; Roubal I; Jackson DB; Paik WN; Wong VK
J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Jun; 2(6):478-84. PubMed ID: 17411863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Factors affecting attending agreement with resident early readings of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the head, neck, and spine.
Sistrom C; Deitte L
Acad Radiol; 2008 Jul; 15(7):934-41. PubMed ID: 18572131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Identifying benchmarks for discrepancy rates in preliminary interpretations provided by radiology trainees at an academic institution.
Ruutiainen AT; Scanlon MH; Itri JN
J Am Coll Radiol; 2011 Sep; 8(9):644-8. PubMed ID: 21889753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quality and variability in diagnostic radiology.
Alpert HR; Hillman BJ
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Feb; 1(2):127-32. PubMed ID: 17411540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Natural language processing using online analytic processing for assessing recommendations in radiology reports.
Dang PA; Kalra MK; Blake MA; Schultz TJ; Stout M; Lemay PR; Freshman DJ; Halpern EF; Dreyer KJ
J Am Coll Radiol; 2008 Mar; 5(3):197-204. PubMed ID: 18312968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Double reading rates and quality assurance practices in Norwegian hospital radiology departments: two parallel national surveys.
Lauritzen PM; Hurlen P; Sandbæk G; Gulbrandsen P
Acta Radiol; 2015 Jan; 56(1):78-86. PubMed ID: 24425793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Radiology resident interpretations of on-call imaging studies: the incidence of major discrepancies.
Cooper VF; Goodhartz LA; Nemcek AA; Ryu RK
Acad Radiol; 2008 Sep; 15(9):1198-204. PubMed ID: 18692761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Turf wars in radiology: the quality of interpretations of imaging studies by nonradiologist physicians--a patient safety issue?
Levin DC; Rao VM
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Jul; 1(7):506-9. PubMed ID: 17411640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Rates of disagreement in imaging interpretation in a group of community hospitals.
Siegle RL; Baram EM; Reuter SR; Clarke EA; Lancaster JL; McMahan CA
Acad Radiol; 1998 Mar; 5(3):148-54. PubMed ID: 9522880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interrater agreement in the evaluation of discrepant imaging findings with the Radpeer system.
Bender LC; Linnau KF; Meier EN; Anzai Y; Gunn ML
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Dec; 199(6):1320-7. PubMed ID: 23169725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The future quality and safety of medical imaging: proceedings of the third annual ACR FORUM.
Hillman BJ; Amis ES; Neiman HL;
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Jan; 1(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 17411517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Digital mammography image quality: image display.
Siegel E; Krupinski E; Samei E; Flynn M; Andriole K; Erickson B; Thomas J; Badano A; Seibert JA; Pisano ED
J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):615-27. PubMed ID: 17412136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Benchmarks for surgical gynecology: results of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics Quality Assurance Study].
Geraedts M; Lüdtke R
Zentralbl Gynakol; 1997; 119(9):417-22. PubMed ID: 9381836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Achievable benchmarks of care for primary care quality indicators in a practice-based research network.
Wessell AM; Liszka HA; Nietert PJ; Jenkins RG; Nemeth LS; Ornstein S
Am J Med Qual; 2008; 23(1):39-46. PubMed ID: 18187589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of competence in the interpretation of chest radiographs.
Cascade PN; Kazerooni EA; Gross BH; Quint LE; Silver TM; Bowerman RA; Pernicano PG; Gebremariam A
Acad Radiol; 2001 Apr; 8(4):315-21. PubMed ID: 11293779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Using QRRO survey data to assess compliance with quality indicators for breast and prostate cancer.
Owen JB; White JR; Zelefsky MJ; Wilson JF
J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 Jun; 6(6):442-7. PubMed ID: 19467491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
