• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine >Radiological errors in the Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine
【24h】

Radiological errors in the Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine

机译：《加拿大急诊医学杂志》中的放射学错误

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objectives:To systematically evaluate the accuracy of text descriptions and labeling of radiologic images published in the Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM). Error detection by radiologists and emergency physicians and the clinical significance and educational value of these errors were assessed. Errors were also correlated with radiologist involvement in publication and imaging modality.Methods:Thirty-three issues of CJEM were examined from January 2003 to May 2008. Electronic copies of all radiologic images published were obtained with their caption and description from the text. Identifying information was removed to present images in an anonymous fashion. Images were presented to two radiologists who, working in consensus, critically appraised each image and accompanying text. Images were then presented to two emergency department physicians who, working in consensus, critically appraised each image and accompanying text. All images with errors detected by either radiology or emergency physicians were then discussed to determine if errors would have affected clinical management or educational value. The emergency physicians also identified “underlabeled” images where it was felt that further labeling would enhance their educational value.Results:Forty-five articles with 82 images were obtained. At least one error was observed in 18 (40%) articles and 20 (24%) images. Two errors were present in three images, resulting in 23 errors. Of the 23 errors, 17 were image description errors and 6 were labeling errors. Five errors were detected by both radiology and emergency physicians, whereas 15 were detected only by radiologists and 3 were detected only by emergency physicians. Of these errors, 12 (52%) were rated as potentially affecting both clinical management and educational value, 5 (22%) as only affecting educational value, and 6 (26%) as nonsignificant. Radiologists were involved in six articles, including 12 images that contained no errors. There was no official radiologist involvement in 39 articles, including 70 images, 18 (26%) of which contained errors. In addition, 26 images were identified by emergency physicians as potentiallybenefiting from enhanced labeling to improve educational value.Conclusions:Radiologic images published in the CJEM are generally of high quality; however, 23 errors were foundin 82 images, 18 (78%) of which were rated as potentially affecting clinical management, educational value, or both. Radiologist involvement in the publication process may be of assistance as no errors were seen in articles that included radiologists as authors.
机译：目的：系统评价在《加拿大急诊医学杂志》（CJEM）上发表的文字说明和放射图像标签的准确性。评估了放射科医生和急诊医师的错误检测以及这些错误的临床意义和教育价值。方法：从2003年1月至2008年5月，共检查了33期CJEM。对所有放射影像的电子副本及其标题和说明进行了电子复制。识别信息已删除，以匿名方式显示图像。图像被提供给两名放射科医生，他们以一致的方式对每个图像和随附的文本进行了严格的评估。然后将图像提供给两名急诊科医师，他们以共识的方式对每个图像和随附的文本进行了严格评估。然后讨论所有由放射科或急诊医师发现错误的图像，以确定错误是否会影响临床管理或教育价值。急诊医师还发现了“标签不足”的图像，认为进一步标记将增强其教育价值。结果：获得了45篇带有82幅图像的文章。在18（40％）的文章和20（24％）的图像中至少观察到一个错误。三个图像中出现两个错误，导致23个错误。在23个错误中，有17个是图像描述错误，有6个是标签错误。放射科和急诊医师均发现了5个错误，而放射科医师仅发现了15个错误，而急诊医师仅发现了3个错误。在这些错误中，有12个（52％）被认为可能同时影响临床管理和教育价值，5（22％）被认为仅影响教育价值，6（26％）被认为不重要。放射科医生参与了六篇文章，其中包括12幅没有错误的图像。官方放射科医生没有涉及39篇文章，包括70幅图像，其中18幅（占26％）包含错误。此外，急诊医生还确认了26张图像，可能通过增强标签来提高教育价值。但是，在82张图像中发现了23个错误，其中18个错误（78％）被定为可能影响临床管理，教育价值或两者兼而有之。放射科医生参与出版过程可能会有所帮助，因为在以放射科医生为作者的文章中没有发现任何错误。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号