{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,14]],"date-time":"2026-09-14T10:08:41Z","timestamp":1789380521678,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":18,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]],"date-time":"2026-06-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1780444800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]],"date-time":"2026-06-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1780444800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"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>Objective<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To assess public attitudes toward prospective disclosure of diagnostic error risk in radiologic imaging (i.e., informing patients in advance about the possibility a radiologic examination may yield an incorrect finding, rather than disclosure of an error after it has occurred) and to identify factors influencing these preferences.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Materials and methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      A population-based survey was conducted in the Netherlands. Participants aged\u2009\u2265\u200918 years (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20091524) responded to CT-scan vignettes describing pre-procedural potential diagnostic errors, varying by patient age (9, 26, 46, or 71 years) and probability of incorrect findings (&lt;\u20090.1%, &lt;\u20091%, &lt;\u20095%, or unspecified). For case vignettes involving 9-year-old patients, participants responded as parents\/guardians. Agreement with \u201cI would want to be informed\u201d was measured using a 4-point Likert scale (1\u2009=\u2009strongly disagree, 2\u2009=\u2009disagree, 3\u2009=\u2009agree, 4\u2009=\u2009strongly agree).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Overall, 88.4% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that patients should be informed about the risk of diagnostic errors. Patient age and diagnostic error risk significantly influenced agreement. Compared with vignettes describing a 71-year-old patient, younger patient ages were associated with higher odds of agreement (9-year-old OR 4.023,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.010; 26-year-old OR 3.222,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.019; 46-year-old OR 2.659,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.022). Compared with vignettes in which diagnostic error risk was unspecified, specifying risks of &lt;\u20090.1% or &lt;\u20091% was associated with lower odds of agreement (&lt;\u20090.1% risk: OR 0.476,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001; &lt;\u20091% risk: OR 0.635,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.002), whereas a &lt;\u20095% risk was not (OR 0.876,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.360).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Public support for prospective disclosure of diagnostic error risk in radiologic imaging is high in the Dutch population, particularly for younger patients and higher-risk scenarios.<\/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>Most adults in the Netherlands support disclosure of diagnostic error risk in radiologic imaging, particularly for younger patients and higher-risk scenarios<\/jats:italic>\n                      .\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Findings<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>Public preferences for disclosure are driven by patient age and error probability, rather than participant demographics or prior radiology experience<\/jats:italic>\n                      .\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Clinical relevance<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>Public support for disclosure of diagnostic error risk in radiologic imaging is high in the Dutch population, especially for younger patients and higher-risk scenarios<\/jats:italic>\n                      .\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]],"date-time":"2026-06-03T14:29:20Z","timestamp":1780496960000},"page":"7632-7638","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Pre-procedural disclosure of potential diagnostic errors in radiology: public perspectives in the Netherlands"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"36","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9005-8529","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Thomas C.","family":"Kwee","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yfke","family":"Ongena","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Marieke","family":"Haan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Derya","family":"Yakar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"12656_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"171","DOI":"10.1007\/s13244-016-0534-1","volume":"8","author":"AP Brady","year":"2017","unstructured":"Brady AP (2017) Error and discrepancy in radiology: Inevitable or avoidable? Insights Imaging 8:171\u2013182","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"12656_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"79","DOI":"10.1515\/dx-2013-0012","volume":"1","author":"L Berlin","year":"2014","unstructured":"Berlin L (2014) Radiologic errors, past, present and future. Diagnosis (Berl) 1:79\u201384","journal-title":"Diagnosis (Berl)"},{"key":"12656_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"163","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-023-01521-7","volume":"14","author":"L Zhang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Zhang L, Wen X, Li JW, Jiang X, Yang XF, Li M (2023) Diagnostic error and bias in the department of radiology: a pictorial essay. Insights Imaging 14:163","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"12656_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejrad.2023.110956","volume":"165","author":"\u00d6 Kasalak","year":"2023","unstructured":"Kasalak \u00d6, Pennings JP, den Akker JWO, Yakar D, Kwee TC (2023) Why don\u2019t we inform patients about the risk of diagnostic errors? Eur J Radiol 165: 10956","journal-title":"Eur J Radiol"},{"key":"12656_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Scherpenzeel AC, Das M (2010) \u201cTrue\u201d longitudinal and probability-based internet panels: evidence from the Netherlands. In: Das M, Ester P, and Kaczmirek L (eds) Social and behavioral research and the internet: advances in applied methods and research strategies. Routledge, New York, pp 77\u2013104","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203844922-4"},{"key":"12656_CR6","unstructured":"Centerdata Research Institute (2026) Survey research and development. Available via https:\/\/en.centerdata.nl\/werkvelden-2\/surveyonderzoek-en-ontwikkeling. Accessed 3 Mar 2026"},{"key":"12656_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-8-50","volume":"8","author":"LM Bachmann","year":"2008","unstructured":"Bachmann LM, M\u00fchleisen A, Bock A, ter Riet G, Held U, Kessels AG (2008) Vignette studies of medical choice and judgement to study caregivers\u2019 medical decision behaviour: systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 8:50","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"12656_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19","volume":"13","author":"MM O\u2019Keeffe","year":"2013","unstructured":"O\u2019Keeffe MM, Davis TM, Siminoski K (2013) A workstation-integrated peer review quality assurance program: pilot study. BMC Med Imaging 13:19. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19","journal-title":"BMC Med Imaging"},{"key":"12656_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Auspurg K, Hinz T (2015) Factorial survey experiments. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks","DOI":"10.4135\/9781483398075"},{"key":"12656_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"492","DOI":"10.1037\/spq0000272","volume":"33","author":"F Huang","year":"2018","unstructured":"Huang F (2018) Multilevel modeling myths. Sch Psychol Q 33:492\u2013499","journal-title":"Sch Psychol Q"},{"key":"12656_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"629","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMsa1012370","volume":"365","author":"AB Jena","year":"2011","unstructured":"Jena AB, Seabury S, Lakdawalla D, Chandra A (2011) Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. N Engl J Med 365:629\u2013636","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"key":"12656_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"539","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.12110971","volume":"266","author":"SR Baker","year":"2013","unstructured":"Baker SR, Whang JS, Luk L, Clarkin KS, Castro A 3rd, Patel R (2013) The demography of medical malpractice suits against radiologists. Radiology 266:539\u2013547","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"12656_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"938","DOI":"10.1053\/crad.2001.0858","volume":"56","author":"R Fitzgerald","year":"2001","unstructured":"Fitzgerald R (2001) Error in radiology. Clin Radiol 56:938\u2013946","journal-title":"Clin Radiol"},{"key":"12656_CR14","first-page":"517","volume":"27","author":"AD Baheti","year":"2017","unstructured":"Baheti AD, Thakur MH, Jankharia B (2017) Informed consent in diagnostic radiology practice: Where do we stand? Indian J Radiol Imaging 27:517\u2013520","journal-title":"Indian J Radiol Imaging"},{"key":"12656_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12911-022-02005-2","volume":"22","author":"RD Vromans","year":"2022","unstructured":"Vromans RD, Hommes S, Clouth FJ et al (2022) Need for numbers: assessing cancer survivors\u2019 needs for personalized and generic statistical information. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 22:260","journal-title":"BMC Med Inform Decis Mak"},{"key":"12656_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e60777","DOI":"10.2196\/60777","volume":"27","author":"KM De Ligt","year":"2025","unstructured":"De Ligt KM, Hommes S, Vromans RD, Boomstra E, van de Poll LV, Krahmer EJ (2025) Improving the implementation of patient-reported outcome measure in clinical practice: tackling current challenges with innovative digital communication technologies. J Med Internet Res 27:e60777","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res"},{"key":"12656_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"704","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1525-1497.2006.00465.x","volume":"21","author":"KM Mazor","year":"2006","unstructured":"Mazor KM, Reed GW, Yood RA, Fischer MA, Baril J, Gurwitz JH (2006) Disclosure of medical errors: What factors influence how patients respond? J Gen Intern Med 21:704\u2013710","journal-title":"J Gen Intern Med"},{"key":"12656_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1472-6939-11-17","volume":"11","author":"MM Hammami","year":"2010","unstructured":"Hammami MM, Attalah S, Al Qadire M (2010) Which medical error to disclose to patients and by whom? Public preference and perceptions of norm and current practice. BMC Med Ethics 11:17","journal-title":"BMC Med Ethics"}],"container-title":["European Radiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,14]],"date-time":"2026-09-14T09:53:29Z","timestamp":1789379609000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]]},"references-count":18,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,10]]}},"alternative-id":["12656"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12656-8","relation":{},"ISSN":["1432-1084"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1432-1084","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,3]]},"assertion":[{"value":"19 December 2025","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"9 April 2026","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"12 May 2026","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"3 June 2026","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"The scientific guarantor of this publication is Thomas Kwee.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Guarantor","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"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":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflict of interest","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","label":"Statistics and biometry","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Participation in the LISS panel followed a two-step informed consent procedure involving both a returned reply card and verification through an online login.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","label":"Informed consent","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Data for this study were drawn from the September 2022 round of the LISS panel, an online survey panel designed to provide a nationally representative sample of the Dutch population aged sixteen and older. The panel\u2019s data collection procedures have been approved by the LISS Board of Overseers.","order":5,"name":"Ethics","label":"Ethical approval","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":6,"name":"Ethics","label":"Study subjects or cohorts overlap","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"order":7,"name":"Ethics","label":"Methodology","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}}]}}