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 Concept Videos

Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure01:10

Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure

Accurate blood pressure assessment is crucial for diagnosing and managing various health conditions. To ensure the reliability of these measurements, healthcare professionals must adhere to standardized pre-procedural guidelines. These guidelines enhance patient safety and improve the overall quality of healthcare. The following steps are essential for obtaining accurate and consistent blood pressure readings, from using the appropriate tools to ensuring effective communication with the patient.
Confidence Coefficient01:24

Confidence Coefficient

The confidence coefficient is also known as the confidence level or degree of confidence. It is the percent expression for the probability, 1-α, that the confidence interval contains the true population parameter assuming that the confidence interval is obtained after sufficient unbiased sampling; for example, if the CL = 90%, then in 90 out of 100 samples the interval estimate will enclose the true population parameter. Here α is the area under the curve, distributed equally under both the...
Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Use of Pediatric Imaging is Increasing Again. Now What?

Hospital pediatrics·2026
Same author

Reply to "Alert Burden and Multivendor Interactions: Missing Dimensions in Radiology Artificial Intelligence Predeployment Evaluation".

AJR. American journal of roentgenology·2026
Same author

Sentence-Level Cross-Referencing Improves Comprehension and Confidence in AI-Generated Patient-Friendly Radiology Reports: Design for Understanding.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same author

Predicting the Value of Radiology Artificial Intelligence Applications: Large-Scale Predeployment Evaluation of a Portfolio of Models.

AJR. American journal of roentgenology·2026
Same author

The ACR Medical Image Quality Assessment System (MIQAS): A Unified Approach to Image Quality Assessment in Radiology.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2025
Same author

Improving Prostate MRI: Lessons Learned from the American College of Radiology's Prostate MR Image Quality Improvement Collaborative.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2025
Same journal

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Myelopathy: 2026 Update.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same journal

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Chronic Knee Pain: Update 2026.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same journal

Reply.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same journal

Radiation Sensibilities: The American College of Radiology Dose Index Registry Empowers Stakeholders in Radiation Dose Optimization.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same journal

Supply Chain Vulnerabilities in Breast Imaging: Site- and Network-Level Strategies for a Concentrated Consumable Market.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
Same journal

Prostate MRI Practices and PI-RADS Use in China's Mainland: A Nationwide Assessment and Opportunities for Standardization.

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 26, 2026

Denver Papillae Protocol for Objective Analysis of Fungiform Papillae
10:50

Denver Papillae Protocol for Objective Analysis of Fungiform Papillae

Published on: June 8, 2015

RADPEER scoring white paper.

Valerie P Jackson1, Trudie Cushing, Hani H Abujudeh

  • 1Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202-5149, USA. vjackso@iupui.edu

Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR
|December 30, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The Radiology Peer Review (RADPEER) program has evolved since 2002, addressing scoring and data consistency. This paper reviews discussions and proposes an updated scoring process and lexicon for RADPEER.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 26, 2026

Denver Papillae Protocol for Objective Analysis of Fungiform Papillae
10:50

Denver Papillae Protocol for Objective Analysis of Fungiform Papillae

Published on: June 8, 2015

Area of Science:

  • Radiology and Medical Imaging Quality Improvement
  • Health Services Research
  • Professional Practice Evaluation

Background:

  • The American College of Radiology (ACR) established the Radiology Peer Review (RADPEER) program in 2002.
  • An electronic version, e-RADPEER, was introduced in 2005, with over 10,000 radiologists and 800 groups participating.
  • Ongoing discussions have focused on RADPEER's scoring system, data subcategorization, and interfacility scoring consistency.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the historical discussions and literature concerning the RADPEER program.
  • To propose a new, refined scoring process and lexicon for RADPEER.
  • To address challenges in subspecialty data categorization and scoring validation.

Main Methods:

  • Review of task force discussions and relevant literature.
  • Analysis of existing RADPEER program components.
  • Development of a revised scoring methodology and standardized terminology.

Main Results:

  • Identified key areas of debate within the RADPEER program.
  • Synthesized findings from literature and task force deliberations.
  • Formulated recommendations for an improved scoring process and lexicon.

Conclusions:

  • The RADPEER program requires continuous refinement to maintain its effectiveness.
  • An updated scoring process and lexicon are crucial for enhancing data consistency and validation.
  • These proposed changes aim to improve the utility and reliability of RADPEER for quality assessment in radiology.