{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,11,2]],"date-time":"2026-11-02T22:03:07Z","timestamp":1793656987089,"version":"4.5.1"},"reference-count":76,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]],"date-time":"2024-11-15T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1731628800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]],"date-time":"2024-11-15T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1731628800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"partnership between Care Research Netherlands and the Medical Sciences domain of the Dutch Research Council","award":["08391052120002"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["08391052120002"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur Radiol"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Since radiology reports are primarily written for health professionals, patients may experience difficulties understanding jargon and terminology used, leading to anxiety and confusion.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>This review evaluates the impact of different radiology report formats on outcomes related to patient information processing, including perception, decision (behavioral intention), action (actual health behavior), and memory (recall of information).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and PsycInfo were searched for relevant qualitative and quantitative articles describing or comparing ways of presenting diagnostic radiology reports to patients. Two reviewers independently screened for relevant articles and extracted data from those included. The quality of articles was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Eighteen studies, two qualitative and sixteen quantitative, were included. Sixteen studies compared multiple presentation formats, most frequently traditional unmodified reports (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200915), or reports with anatomic illustrations (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20098), lay summaries (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20096) or glossaries (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20096). Glossaries, illustrations, lay summaries, lay reports or lay conclusions all significantly improved participants\u2019 cognitive perception and perception of communication of radiology reports, compared to traditional reports. Furthermore, these formats increased affective perception (e.g., reduced anxiety and worry), although only significant for lay reports and conclusions.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Modifying traditional radiology reports with glossaries, illustrations or lay language enhances patient information processing.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Key Points<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Question<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>Identifying the impact of different radiology report formats on outcomes related to patient information processing to enhance patient engagement through online access to radiology reports.<\/jats:italic>\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Findings<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>Lay language summaries, glossaries with patient-oriented definitions, and anatomic illustrations increase patients\u2019 satisfaction with and understanding of their radiology reports.<\/jats:italic>\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Clinical relevance<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>To increase patients\u2019 satisfaction, perceived usefulness and understanding with radiology reports, the use of lay language summaries, glossaries with patient-oriented definitions, and anatomic illustrations is recommended. These modifications decrease patients\u2019 unnecessary insecurity, confusion, anxiety and physician consultations after viewing reports.<\/jats:italic>\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]],"date-time":"2024-11-15T08:05:06Z","timestamp":1731657906000},"page":"2644-2657","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":32,"title":["The impact of different radiology report formats on patient information processing: a systematic review"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"35","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0004-4894-119X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"F. A. M.","family":"van der Mee","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"R. P. G.","family":"Ottenheijm","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"E. G. S.","family":"Gentry","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"J. M.","family":"Nobel","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"F. M.","family":"Zijta","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"J. W. L.","family":"Cals","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"J.","family":"Jansen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]]},"reference":[{"key":"11165_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"188","DOI":"10.1093\/fampra\/cmq092","volume":"28","author":"V Bhavnani","year":"2011","unstructured":"Bhavnani V, Fisher B, Winfield M, Seed P (2011) How patients use access to their electronic GP record\u2014a quantitative study. Fam Pract 28:188\u2013194","journal-title":"Fam Pract"},{"key":"11165_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1608","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2016.09.007","volume":"13","author":"CI Lee","year":"2016","unstructured":"Lee CI, Langlotz CP, Elmore JG (2016) Implications of direct patient online access to radiology reports through patient web portals. J Am Coll Radiol 13:1608\u20131614","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"798","DOI":"10.1197\/jamia.M2302","volume":"14","author":"JD Ralston","year":"2007","unstructured":"Ralston JD, Carrell D, Reid R, Anderson M, Moran M, Hereford J (2007) Patient web services integrated with a shared medical record: patient use and satisfaction. J Am Med Inform Assoc 14:798\u2013806","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"key":"11165_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1162","DOI":"10.1016\/j.acra.2016.05.005","volume":"23","author":"RC Miles","year":"2016","unstructured":"Miles RC, Hippe DS, Elmore JG, Wang CL, Payne TH, Lee CI (2016) Patient access to online radiology reports: frequency and sociodemographic characteristics associated with use. Acad Radiol 23:1162\u20131169","journal-title":"Acad Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e65","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2356","volume":"15","author":"SS Woods","year":"2013","unstructured":"Woods SS, Schwartz E, Tuepker A et al (2013) Patient experiences with full electronic access to health records and clinical notes through the My HealtheVet Personal Health Record Pilot: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res 15:e65","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res"},{"key":"11165_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1186\/1472-6947-12-87","volume":"12","author":"C Bartlett","year":"2012","unstructured":"Bartlett C, Simpson K, Turner AN (2012) Patient access to complex chronic disease records on the Internet. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 12:87","journal-title":"BMC Med Inform Decis Mak"},{"key":"11165_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e15723","DOI":"10.2196\/15723","volume":"22","author":"C Baun","year":"2020","unstructured":"Baun C, Vogsen M, Nielsen MK, H\u00f8ilund-Carlsen PF, Hildebrandt MG (2020) Perspective of patients with metastatic breast cancer on electronic access to scan results: mixed-methods study. J Med Internet Res 22:e15723","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res"},{"key":"11165_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"539","DOI":"10.1258\/jrsm.2009.090328","volume":"102","author":"B Fisher","year":"2009","unstructured":"Fisher B, Bhavnani V, Winfield M (2009) How patients use access to their full health records: a qualitative study of patients in general practice. J R Soc Med 102:539\u2013544","journal-title":"J R Soc Med"},{"key":"11165_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"581","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.330.7491.581","volume":"330","author":"T Garrido","year":"2005","unstructured":"Garrido T, Jamieson L, Zhou Y, Wiesenthal A, Liang L (2005) Effect of electronic health records in ambulatory care: retrospective, serial, cross sectional study. BMJ 330:581","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"11165_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e0154743","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0154743","volume":"11","author":"F Pillemer","year":"2016","unstructured":"Pillemer F, Price RA, Paone S et al (2016) Direct release of test results to patients increases patient engagement and utilization of care. PLoS One 11:e0154743","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"key":"11165_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1075","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1525-1497.2006.00553.x","volume":"21","author":"S Sung","year":"2006","unstructured":"Sung S, Forman\u2010Hoffman V, Wilson MC, Cram P (2006) Direct reporting of laboratory test results to patients by mail to enhance patient safety. J Gen Intern Med 21:1075\u20131078","journal-title":"J Gen Intern Med"},{"key":"11165_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Palen TE, Ross C, Powers JD, Xu S (2012) Association of online patient access to clinicians and medical records with use of clinical services. J Am Med Assoc 308:2012\u20132019","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2012.14126"},{"key":"11165_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"140","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.16.16633","volume":"208","author":"AB Rosenkrantz","year":"2017","unstructured":"Rosenkrantz AB (2017) Differences in perceptions among radiologists, referring physicians, and patients regarding language for incidental findings reporting. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:140\u2013143","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"11165_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e47","DOI":"10.1093\/jamia\/ocw098","volume":"24","author":"L Tieu","year":"2017","unstructured":"Tieu L, Schillinger D, Sarkar U et al (2017) Online patient websites for electronic health record access among vulnerable populations: portals to nowhere? J Am Med Inform Assoc 24:e47\u2013e54","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"key":"11165_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1169","DOI":"10.1016\/j.acra.2017.03.005","volume":"24","author":"TS Cook","year":"2017","unstructured":"Cook TS, Oh SC, Kahn Jr CE (2017) Patients\u2019 use and evaluation of an online system to annotate radiology reports with lay language definitions. Acad Radiol 24:1169\u20131174","journal-title":"Acad Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"863","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2014.03.014","volume":"11","author":"MA Bruno","year":"2014","unstructured":"Bruno MA, Petscavage-Thomas JM, Mohr MJ, Bell SK, Brown SD (2014) The \u201copen letter\u201d: radiologists\u2019 reports in the era of patient web portals. J Am Coll Radiol 11:863\u2013867","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1028","DOI":"10.1136\/amiajnl-2012-001457","volume":"20","author":"CW Arnold","year":"2013","unstructured":"Arnold CW, McNamara M, El-Saden S, Chen S, Taira RK, Bui AA (2013) Imaging informatics for consumer health: towards a radiology patient portal. J Am Med Inform Assoc 20:1028\u20131036","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"key":"11165_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"281","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2009.10.011","volume":"7","author":"AJ Johnson","year":"2010","unstructured":"Johnson AJ, Frankel RM, Williams LS, Glover S, Easterling D (2010) Patient access to radiology reports: what do physicians think? J Am Coll Radiol 7:281\u2013289","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"116","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2018.12.006","volume":"54","author":"T Martin-Carreras","year":"2019","unstructured":"Martin-Carreras T, Cook TS, Kahn JrCE (2019) Readability of radiology reports: implications for patient-centered care. Clin Imaging 54:116\u2013120","journal-title":"Clin Imaging"},{"key":"11165_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1015","DOI":"10.1016\/j.crad.2011.05.013","volume":"66","author":"A Wallis","year":"2011","unstructured":"Wallis A, McCoubrie P (2011) The radiology report\u2014are we getting the message across? Clin Radiol 66:1015\u20131022","journal-title":"Clin Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-020-00864-9","volume":"11","author":"CI Farmer","year":"2020","unstructured":"Farmer CI, Bourne AM, O\u2019Connor D, Jarvik JG, Buchbinder R (2020) Enhancing clinician and patient understanding of radiology reports: a scoping review of international guidelines. Insights Imaging 11:1\u201310","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"11165_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e049938","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2021-049938","volume":"11","author":"C Farmer","year":"2021","unstructured":"Farmer C, O\u2019Connor DA, Lee H et al (2021) Consumer understanding of terms used in imaging reports requested for low back pain: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open 11:e049938","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"11165_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e008094","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2015-008094","volume":"5","author":"K McCaffery","year":"2015","unstructured":"McCaffery K, Nickel B, Moynihan R et al (2015) How different terminology for ductal carcinoma in situ impacts women\u2019s concern and treatment preferences: a randomised comparison within a national community survey. BMJ Open 5:e008094","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"11165_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"123","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.17.18448","volume":"210","author":"MI Mityul","year":"2018","unstructured":"Mityul MI, Gilcrease-Garcia B, Searleman A, Demertzis JL, Gunn AJ (2018) Interpretive differences between patients and radiologists regarding the diagnostic confidence associated with commonly used phrases in the radiology report. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:123\u2013126","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"11165_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-020-00930-2","volume":"12","author":"M Alarifi","year":"2021","unstructured":"Alarifi M, Patrick T, Jabour A, Wu M, Luo J (2021) Understanding patient needs and gaps in radiology reports through online discussion forum analysis. Insights Imaging 12:1\u20139","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"11165_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"354","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejrad.2008.06.023","volume":"72","author":"JM Bosmans","year":"2009","unstructured":"Bosmans JM, Weyler JJ, Parizel PM (2009) Structure and content of radiology reports, a quantitative and qualitative study in eight medical centers. Eur J Radiol 72:354\u2013358","journal-title":"Eur J Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1262","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.16.17584","volume":"208","author":"AJ Gunn","year":"2017","unstructured":"Gunn AJ, Gilcrease-Garcia B, Mangano MD, Sahani DV, Boland GW, Choy G (2017) JOURNAL CLUB: structured feedback from patients on actual radiology reports: a novel approach to improve reporting practices. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1262\u20131270","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"11165_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6857","DOI":"10.1007\/s00520-022-07108-0","volume":"30","author":"N Perlis","year":"2022","unstructured":"Perlis N, Finelli A, Lovas M et al (2022) Exploring the value of using patient-oriented MRI reports in clinical practice\u2014a pilot study. Support Care Cancer 30:6857\u20136876","journal-title":"Support Care Cancer"},{"key":"11165_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"128","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2020.09.049","volume":"18","author":"N Kadom","year":"2021","unstructured":"Kadom N, Tamasi S, Vey BL et al (2021) Info-RADS: adding a message for patients in radiology reports. J Am Coll Radiol 18:128\u2013132","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Wickens CD, Helton WS, Hollands JG, Banbury S (2021) Engineering psychology and human performance. Routledge, New York","DOI":"10.4324\/9781003177616"},{"key":"11165_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2656","DOI":"10.1111\/risa.13875","volume":"42","author":"JS Ancker","year":"2022","unstructured":"Ancker JS, Benda NC, Sharma MM, Johnson SB, Weiner S, Zikmund\u2010Fisher BJ (2022) Taxonomies for synthesizing the evidence on communicating numbers in health: goals, format, and structure. Risk Anal 42:2656\u20132670","journal-title":"Risk Anal"},{"key":"11165_CR32","volume":"88","author":"MJ Page","year":"2021","unstructured":"Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 88:105906","journal-title":"Int J Surg"},{"key":"11165_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Wohlin C (2014) Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, London. Association for Computing Machinery, pp 1\u201310","DOI":"10.1145\/2601248.2601268"},{"key":"11165_CR34","unstructured":"The EndNote Team (2013) EndNote. EndNote 20 ed. Clarivate, Philadelphia"},{"key":"11165_CR35","unstructured":"Covidence systematic review software. Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne. Available via www.covidence.org. [Accessed 20 February 2024]"},{"key":"11165_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"276","DOI":"10.11613\/BM.2012.031","volume":"22","author":"ML McHugh","year":"2012","unstructured":"McHugh ML (2012) Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med 22:276\u2013282","journal-title":"Biochem Med"},{"key":"11165_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e53993","DOI":"10.2196\/53993","volume":"26","author":"FAM van der Mee","year":"2024","unstructured":"van der Mee FAM, Schaper F, Jansen J, Bons JAP, Meex SJR, Cals JWL (2024) Enhancing patient understanding of laboratory test results: systematic review of presentation formats and their impact on perception, decision, action, and memory. J Med Internet Res 26:e53993","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res"},{"key":"11165_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"324","DOI":"10.1177\/109019817400200401","volume":"2","author":"MH Becker","year":"1974","unstructured":"Becker MH (1974) The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Educ Monogr 2:324\u2013508","journal-title":"Health Educ Monogr"},{"key":"11165_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"329","DOI":"10.1080\/03637759209376276","volume":"59","author":"K Witte","year":"1992","unstructured":"Witte K (1992) Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel process model. Commun Monogr 59:329\u2013349","journal-title":"Commun Monogr"},{"key":"11165_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hong QN, F\u00e0bregues S, Bartlett G et al (2018) The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. EFI 34:285\u2013291","DOI":"10.3233\/EFI-180221"},{"key":"11165_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"47","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002","volume":"49","author":"R Pace","year":"2012","unstructured":"Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G et al (2012) Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int J Nurs Stud 49:47\u201353","journal-title":"Int J Nurs Stud"},{"key":"11165_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"120","DOI":"10.1097\/XEB.0000000000000282","volume":"19","author":"C Stern","year":"2021","unstructured":"Stern C, Lizarondo L, Carrier J et al (2021) Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews. JBI Evid Implement 19:120\u2013129","journal-title":"JBI Evid Implement"},{"key":"11165_CR43","first-page":"121","volume":"13","author":"A Pearson","year":"2015","unstructured":"Pearson A, White H, Bath-Hextall F, Salmond S, Apostolo J, Kirkpatrick P (2015) A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews. JBI Evid Implement 13:121\u2013131","journal-title":"JBI Evid Implement"},{"key":"11165_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3637","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-013-3100-x","volume":"471","author":"JK Bossen","year":"2013","unstructured":"Bossen JK, Hageman MG, King JD, Ring DC (2013) Does rewording MRI reports improve patient understanding and emotional response to a clinical report? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3637\u20133644","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"11165_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e29496","DOI":"10.2196\/29496","volume":"6","author":"EC Norris","year":"2022","unstructured":"Norris EC, Halaska C, Sachs PB, Lin C-T, Sanfilippo K, Honce JM (2022) Understanding patient experiences, opinions, and actions taken after viewing their own radiology images online: web-based survey. JMIR Form Res 6:e29496","journal-title":"JMIR Form Res"},{"key":"11165_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"509","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.22.27512","volume":"219","author":"MP Recht","year":"2022","unstructured":"Recht MP, Westerhoff M, Doshi AM et al (2022) Video radiology reports: a valuable tool to improve patient-centered radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 219:509\u2013519","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"11165_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1489","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2017.07.027","volume":"14","author":"RG Short","year":"2017","unstructured":"Short RG, Middleton D, Befera NT, Gondalia R, Tailor TD (2017) Patient-centered radiology reporting: using online crowdsourcing to assess the effectiveness of a web-based interactive radiology report. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1489\u20131497","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR48","first-page":"108","volume":"15","author":"N Perlis","year":"2021","unstructured":"Perlis N, Finelli A, Lovas M et al (2021) Creating patient-centered radiology reports to empower patients undergoing prostate magnetic resonance imaging. Can Urol Assoc J 15:108","journal-title":"Can Urol Assoc J"},{"key":"11165_CR49","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1388","DOI":"10.1016\/j.acra.2023.08.005","volume":"31","author":"S Woo","year":"2024","unstructured":"Woo S, Andrieu PC, Abu-Rustum NR et al (2024) Bridging communication gaps between radiologists, referring physicians, and patients through standardized structured cancer imaging reporting: the experience with female pelvic MRI assessment using O-RADS and a simulated cohort patient group. Acad Radiol 31:1388\u20131397","journal-title":"Acad Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"895","DOI":"10.1007\/s13187-022-02204-5","volume":"38","author":"J Wieland","year":"2023","unstructured":"Wieland J, Quinn K, Stenger K, Cheng S, Acoba J (2023) Patient understanding of oncologic radiology reports: is access to electronic medical records helpful? J Cancer Educ 38:895\u2013899","journal-title":"J Cancer Educ"},{"key":"11165_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"705","DOI":"10.1007\/s10278-021-00448-z","volume":"34","author":"M Alarifi","year":"2021","unstructured":"Alarifi M, Patrick T, Jabour A, Wu M, Luo J (2021) Designing a consumer-friendly radiology report using a patient-centered approach. J Digit Imaging 34:705\u2013716","journal-title":"J Digit Imaging"},{"key":"11165_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1316","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.19.22202","volume":"214","author":"JK Cho","year":"2020","unstructured":"Cho JK, Zafar HM, Cook TS (2020) Use of an online crowdsourcing platform to assess patient comprehension of radiology reports and colloquialisms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 214:1316\u20131320","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"11165_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"377","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2021.10.008","volume":"19","author":"J Kemp","year":"2022","unstructured":"Kemp J, Short R, Bryant S, Sample L, Befera N (2022) Patient-friendly radiology reporting\u2014implementation and outcomes. J Am Coll Radiol 19:377\u2013383","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1259","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2020.04.003","volume":"17","author":"A Dabrowiecki","year":"2020","unstructured":"Dabrowiecki A, Sadigh G, Duszak JrR (2020) Chest radiograph reporting: public preferences and perceptions. J Am Coll Radiol 17:1259\u20131268","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"146045822110112","DOI":"10.1177\/14604582211011215","volume":"27","author":"Z Zhang","year":"2021","unstructured":"Zhang Z, Citardi D, Wang D, Genc Y, Shan J, Fan X (2021) Patients\u2019 perceptions of using artificial intelligence (AI)-based technology to comprehend radiology imaging data. Health Informatics J 27:14604582211011215","journal-title":"Health Informatics J"},{"key":"11165_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"256","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2011.12.023","volume":"9","author":"AJ Johnson","year":"2012","unstructured":"Johnson AJ, Easterling D, Nelson R, Chen MY, Frankel RM (2012) Access to radiologic reports via a patient portal: clinical simulations to investigate patient preferences. J Am Coll Radiol 9:256\u2013263","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jbi.2019.103222","volume":"95","author":"M Krahe","year":"2019","unstructured":"Krahe M, Milligan E, Reilly S (2019) Personal health information in research: perceived risk, trustworthiness and opinions from patients attending a tertiary healthcare facility. J Biomed Inform 95:103222","journal-title":"J Biomed Inform"},{"key":"11165_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1016\/j.socscimed.2021.114150","volume":"282","author":"E Goodwin","year":"2021","unstructured":"Goodwin E, Davey A, Green C, Hawton A (2021) What drives differences in preferences for health states between patients and the public? A qualitative investigation of respondents\u2019 thought processes. Soc Sci Med 282:114150","journal-title":"Soc Sci Med"},{"key":"11165_CR59","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1187","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-022-03304-x","volume":"32","author":"PA Powell","year":"2023","unstructured":"Powell PA, Karimi M, Rowen D, Devlin N, van Hout B, Brazier JE (2023) Hypothetical versus experienced health state valuation: a qualitative study of adult general public views and preferences. Qual Life Res 32:1187\u20131197","journal-title":"Qual Life Res"},{"key":"11165_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"241","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1012791822804","volume":"20","author":"JA List","year":"2001","unstructured":"List JA, Gallet CA (2001) What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values? Environ Resour Econ 20:241\u2013254","journal-title":"Environ Resour Econ"},{"key":"11165_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"313","DOI":"10.1007\/s10640-004-3332-z","volume":"30","author":"JJ Murphy","year":"2005","unstructured":"Murphy JJ, Allen PG, Stevens TH, Weatherhead D (2005) A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environ Resour Econ 30:313\u2013325","journal-title":"Environ Resour Econ"},{"key":"11165_CR62","first-page":"1","volume":"3","author":"J Little","year":"2004","unstructured":"Little J, Berrens RP (2004) Explaining disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values: further investigation using meta-analysis. Econ Bull 3:1\u201313","journal-title":"Econ Bull"},{"key":"11165_CR63","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"461","DOI":"10.1523\/JNEUROSCI.1583-10.2011","volume":"31","author":"MJ Kang","year":"2011","unstructured":"Kang MJ, Rangel A, Camus M, Camerer CF (2011) Hypothetical and real choice differentially activate common valuation areas. J Neurosci 31:461\u2013468","journal-title":"J Neurosci"},{"key":"11165_CR64","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e0198835","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0198835","volume":"13","author":"K Walters","year":"2018","unstructured":"Walters K, Christakis DA, Wright DR (2018) Are Mechanical Turk worker samples representative of health status and health behaviors in the US? PLoS One 13:e0198835","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"key":"11165_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1177\/2158244016636433","volume":"6","author":"KE Levay","year":"2016","unstructured":"Levay KE, Freese J, Druckman JN (2016) The demographic and political composition of Mechanical Turk samples. Sage Open 6:2158244016636433","journal-title":"Sage Open"},{"key":"11165_CR66","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"211","DOI":"10.1097\/MLR.0000000000000871","volume":"56","author":"K Mortensen","year":"2018","unstructured":"Mortensen K, Alcal\u00e1 MG, French MT, Hu T (2018) Self-reported health status differs for Amazon\u2019s Mechanical Turk respondents compared with nationally representative surveys. Med Care 56:211\u2013215","journal-title":"Med Care"},{"key":"11165_CR67","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"57.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jpurol.2017.08.014","volume":"14","author":"GW Dy","year":"2018","unstructured":"Dy GW, Gore JL, Muncey WW, Ellison JS, Merguerian PA (2018) Comparative effectiveness of a pilot patient-centered ultrasound report in the management of hydronephrosis. J Pediatr Urol 14:57.e1\u201357.e7","journal-title":"J Pediatr Urol"},{"key":"11165_CR68","first-page":"1","volume":"43","author":"KJ McCaffery","year":"2023","unstructured":"McCaffery KJ, Ayre J, Dodd R et al (2023) Disparities in public understanding, attitudes, and intentions during the Covid-19 pandemic: the role of health literacy. Inf Serv Use 43:1\u201313","journal-title":"Inf Serv Use"},{"key":"11165_CR69","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2572","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-010-1380-y","volume":"468","author":"S Badarudeen","year":"2010","unstructured":"Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S (2010) Assessing readability of patient education materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2572\u20132580","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"11165_CR70","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e2018033","DOI":"10.1001\/jamanetworkopen.2020.18033","volume":"3","author":"V Mishra","year":"2020","unstructured":"Mishra V, Dexter JP (2020) Comparison of readability of official public health information about COVID-19 on websites of international agencies and the governments of 15 countries. JAMA Netw Open 3:e2018033","journal-title":"JAMA Netw Open"},{"key":"11165_CR71","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1565","DOI":"10.1007\/s00405-023-08337-7","volume":"281","author":"G Briganti","year":"2024","unstructured":"Briganti G (2024) How ChatGPT works: a mini review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 281:1565\u20131569","journal-title":"Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol"},{"key":"11165_CR72","unstructured":"Tunstall L, Von Werra L, Wolf T (2022) Natural language processing with transformers. O\u2019Reilly Media, Inc., Sebastopol"},{"key":"11165_CR73","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1077","DOI":"10.1002\/ksa.12133","volume":"32","author":"JJ Butler","year":"2024","unstructured":"Butler JJ, Puleo J, Harrington MC et al (2024) From technical to understandable: artificial intelligence large language models improve the readability of knee radiology reports. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 32:1077\u20131086","journal-title":"Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc"},{"key":"11165_CR74","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1256","DOI":"10.1016\/j.acra.2023.08.039","volume":"31","author":"S Bajaj","year":"2024","unstructured":"Bajaj S, Gandhi D, Nayar D (2024) Potential applications and impact of ChatGPT in radiology. Acad Radiol 31:1256\u20131261","journal-title":"Acad Radiol"},{"key":"11165_CR75","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"199","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-023-01560-0","volume":"14","author":"European Society of Radiology (ESR)","year":"2023","unstructured":"European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2023) ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology\u2014update 2023. Insights Imaging 14:199","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"11165_CR76","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"10","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-019-0831-6","volume":"11","author":"JM Nobel","year":"2020","unstructured":"Nobel JM, Kok EM, Robben SG (2020) Redefining the structure of structured reporting in radiology. Insights Imaging 11:10","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"}],"container-title":["European Radiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,24]],"date-time":"2025-04-24T07:05:33Z","timestamp":1745478333000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]]},"references-count":76,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,5]]}},"alternative-id":["11165"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00330-024-11165-w","relation":{},"ISSN":["1432-1084"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1432-1084","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,15]]},"assertion":[{"value":"10 June 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"21 August 2024","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"26 September 2024","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"15 November 2024","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"The scientific guarantor of this publication is J.J.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Guarantor"}},{"value":"The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Statistics and biometry"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":5,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Informed consent"}},{"value":"Institutional Review Board approval was not required because this publication is a review study of existing data.","order":6,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval"}},{"value":"Study subjects and cohorts have been previously reported in the eighteen included articles of this systematic review.","order":7,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Study subjects or cohorts overlap"}},{"order":8,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Methodology"}}]}}