↓ Skip to main content

Radiology reporting—from Hemingway to HAL?

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Radiology reporting—from Hemingway to HAL?
Published in
Insights into Imaging, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13244-018-0596-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian P. Brady

Abstract

The job of the diagnostic radiologist is two-fold: identifying and interpreting the information available from diagnostic imaging studies and communicating that interpretation meaningfully to the referring clinician. However skilled our interpretive abilities, our patients are not well served if we fail to convey our conclusions effectively. Despite the central importance of communication skills to the work of radiologists, trainees rarely receive significant formal training in reporting skills, and much of the training given simply reflects the trainer's personal preferences. Studies have shown a preference among referrers for reports in a structured form, with findings given in a standard manner, followed by a conclusion. The technical competence to incorporate structured report templates into PACS/RIS systems is growing, "...and radiology societies (including the European Society of Radiology (ESR)) are active in producing and validating templates for a wide range of modalities and clinical circumstances. While some radiologists may prefer prose format reports, and much literature has been produced addressing "dos and don'ts" for such prose reports, it seems likely that structured reporting will become the norm in the near future. Benefits will include homogenisation and standardisation of reports, certainty that significant information has not been omitted, and capacity for data-mining of structured reports for research and teaching purposes. • The radiologist's job includes interpretation of imaging studies AND communication. • Traditionally, communication has taken the form of a prose report. • Referrers have been shown to prefer reports in a structured format. • Structured reports have many advantages over traditional prose reports. • It is likely that structured reports represent the future standard.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 20%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 6 7%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 19 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 37%
Computer Science 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Engineering 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 27 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2023.
All research outputs
#4,068,811
of 25,192,722 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#242
of 1,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,164
of 339,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#8
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,192,722 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.