TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing preliminary and final neuroradiology reports
T2 - What factors determine the differences?
AU - Stankiewicz, K.
AU - Cohen, M.
AU - Carone, M.
AU - Sevinc, G.
AU - Nagy, P. G.
AU - Lewin, J. S.
AU - Yousem, D. M.
AU - Babiarz, L. S.
PY - 2016/11
Y1 - 2016/11
N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Trainees' interpretations of neuroradiologic studies are finalized by faculty neuroradiologists. We aimed to identify the factors that determine the degree to which the preliminary reports are modified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The character length of the preliminary and final reports and the percentage character change between the 2 reports were determined for neuroradiology reports composed during November 2012 to October 2013. Examination time, critical finding flag, missed critical finding flag, trainee level, faculty experience, imaging technique, and native-versus-non-native speaker status of the reader were collected. Multivariable linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between mean percentage character change and the various factors. RESULTS: Of 34,661 reports, 2322 (6.7%) were read by radiology residents year 1; 4429 (12.8%), by radiology residents year 2; 3663 (10.6%), by radiology residents year 3; 2249 (6.5%), by radiology residents year 4; and 21,998 (63.5%), by fellows. The overall mean percentage character change was 14.8% (range, 0%-701.8%; median, 6.6%). Mean percentage character change increased for a missed critical finding (+41.6%, P≤ .0001), critical finding flag (+1.8%, P≤.001), MR imaging studies (+3.6%, P≤.001), and non-native trainees (+4.2%, P=.018). Compared with radiology residents year 1, radiology residents year 2 (-5.4%, P=.002), radiology residents year 3 (-5.9%, P=.002), radiology residents year 4 (-8.2%, P ≤ .001), and fellows (-8.7%; P ≤ .001) had a decreased mean percentage character change. Senior faculty had a lower mean percentage character change (-6.88%, P≤.001). Examination time and non-native faculty did not affect mean percentage character change. CONCLUSIONS: A missed critical finding, critical finding flag, MR imaging technique, trainee level, faculty experience level, and nonnative-Trainee status are associated with a higher degree of modification of a preliminary report. Understanding the factors that influence the extent of report revisions could improve the quality of report generation and trainee education.
AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Trainees' interpretations of neuroradiologic studies are finalized by faculty neuroradiologists. We aimed to identify the factors that determine the degree to which the preliminary reports are modified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The character length of the preliminary and final reports and the percentage character change between the 2 reports were determined for neuroradiology reports composed during November 2012 to October 2013. Examination time, critical finding flag, missed critical finding flag, trainee level, faculty experience, imaging technique, and native-versus-non-native speaker status of the reader were collected. Multivariable linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between mean percentage character change and the various factors. RESULTS: Of 34,661 reports, 2322 (6.7%) were read by radiology residents year 1; 4429 (12.8%), by radiology residents year 2; 3663 (10.6%), by radiology residents year 3; 2249 (6.5%), by radiology residents year 4; and 21,998 (63.5%), by fellows. The overall mean percentage character change was 14.8% (range, 0%-701.8%; median, 6.6%). Mean percentage character change increased for a missed critical finding (+41.6%, P≤ .0001), critical finding flag (+1.8%, P≤.001), MR imaging studies (+3.6%, P≤.001), and non-native trainees (+4.2%, P=.018). Compared with radiology residents year 1, radiology residents year 2 (-5.4%, P=.002), radiology residents year 3 (-5.9%, P=.002), radiology residents year 4 (-8.2%, P ≤ .001), and fellows (-8.7%; P ≤ .001) had a decreased mean percentage character change. Senior faculty had a lower mean percentage character change (-6.88%, P≤.001). Examination time and non-native faculty did not affect mean percentage character change. CONCLUSIONS: A missed critical finding, critical finding flag, MR imaging technique, trainee level, faculty experience level, and nonnative-Trainee status are associated with a higher degree of modification of a preliminary report. Understanding the factors that influence the extent of report revisions could improve the quality of report generation and trainee education.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995596359&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995596359&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3174/ajnr.A4897
DO - 10.3174/ajnr.A4897
M3 - Article
C2 - 27469208
AN - SCOPUS:84995596359
SN - 0195-6108
VL - 37
SP - 1977
EP - 1982
JO - American Journal of Neuroradiology
JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology
IS - 11
ER -