Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Managing errors in radiology: a working model.

C Melvin1, R Bodley, A Booth

  • 1Department of Radiology, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Aylesbury HP21 8AL, UK. catherine.melvin@smh.nhs.uk

Clinical Radiology
|September 8, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Searching smarter, not harder: leveraging AI to enhance literature searches for theory-driven reviews-A methodological case study.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same author

Demographics of epithelioid trophoblastic tumour and placental site trophoblastic tumour: a 21 year UK population study.

Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology : the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology·2025
Same author

Developing the embedded researcher role: Learning from the first year of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), Health Determinants Research Collaboration (HDRC), Doncaster, UK.

Public health in practice (Oxford, England)·2024
Same author

Knowledge on impact of lifestyle and demographic factors on fertility.

Irish medical journal·2024
Same author

Experiences of hospice dementia care: A qualitative study of bereaved carers and hospice clinicians.

PloS one·2023
Same author

Caregiver experiences of hospice dementia care: a systematic review and meta-ethnography.

Aging & mental health·2023
Same journal

Diagnostic accuracy of flat panel computed tomography for acute stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Clinical radiology·2026
Same journal

Nuclear medicine techniques in gynaecological malignancy: a review of best practice.

Clinical radiology·2026
Same journal

Deep learning reconstruction dual-energy computed tomography for gastrointestinal system tumors: low-kiloelectron volt imaging vs routine imaging.

Clinical radiology·2026
Same journal

Deep learning-based reconstruction for 5.0T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: comparison of image quality and diagnostic efficacy.

Clinical radiology·2026
Same journal

Papillary muscle fibrosis on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a pictorial review of causes, diagnostic challenges and practical pearls.

Clinical radiology·2026
Same journal

Deep learning-based automated assessment of pulmonary artery indices and surgical approach triage for tetralogy of Fallot from multicenter cardiac computed tomography (CT).

Clinical radiology·2026
See all related articles

A new process for reviewing radiology reporting discrepancies was developed. This system successfully identified and amended errors, improving patient care and radiologist performance awareness.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Imaging
  • Radiology
  • Quality Improvement

Background:

  • Reporting discrepancies in radiology can impact patient care.
  • The Royal College of Radiologists highlighted the need for reviewing these errors.
  • A structured approach is necessary to manage and learn from reporting mistakes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To establish a practical mechanism for reviewing radiology reporting discrepancies.
  • To implement a system aligned with recommendations for error review.
  • To create an auditable process for tracking reporting errors.

Main Methods:

  • Developed a regular departmental meeting for discrepancy review.
  • Created standardized forms for case submission, recording, and classification.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Established an annual audit of discrepancy figures.

    • Main Results:

    • Reviewed 81 cases involving errors over 12 months.
    • Amended 24 radiology reports following meeting discussions.
    • Identified 19 additional cases for teaching or discussion.

    Conclusions:

    • Successfully implemented a radiology reporting error review process.
    • The process has full support from clinical radiologists.
    • Improved patient care through increased awareness of performance lapses.