| Title |
European Society of Radiology (ESR) and American College of Radiology (ACR) report of the 2015 global summit on radiological quality and safety
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Insights into Imaging, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13244-016-0493-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
European Society of Radiology (ESR), American College of Radiology (ACR) |
| Abstract |
The American College of Radiology (ACR) and the European Society of Radiology (ESR) held the second joint Global Summit on Radiological Quality and Safety on October 10-11, 2015 in Barcelona. The programme addressed the issues of safety, professional performance, practice improvement and customer service. Participants came from national and international radiological societies; partner medical societies; global organisations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organisation; and patient advocacy groups. The objective was to exchange ideas and develop common strategies to improve and harmonise quality and safety in radiology on a global level. Participants debated and proposed improvement initiatives at the conclusion of the meeting. • Radiologists must adapt to demonstrate their value to the healthcare system. • Integration of quality and safety policies is crucial for our profession. • Excellent patient care includes good communication and direct involvement in clinical problem solving. • Culture is shifting towards clinical decision support tools for appropriate use of imaging. • "Big data" is a great opportunity for radiologists to improve the quality of patient care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 21% |
| United States | 2 | 14% |
| Portugal | 1 | 7% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 64% |
| Scientists | 2 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 15% |
| Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 25% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,521,677
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#206
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,020
of 339,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 339,802 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.