{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,16]],"date-time":"2025-06-16T16:28:05Z","timestamp":1750091285885},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,4]],"date-time":"2013-07-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1372896000000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/www.springer.com\/tdm"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Med Imaging"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The surrogate indicator of radiological excellence that has become accepted is consistency of assessments between radiologists, and the technique that has become the standard for evaluating concordance is peer review. This study describes the results of a workstation-integrated peer review program in a busy outpatient radiology practice.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>Workstation-based peer review was performed using the software program Intelerad Peer Review. Cases for review were randomly chosen from those being actively reported. If an appropriate prior study was available, and if the reviewing radiologist and the original interpreting radiologist had not exceeded review targets, the case was scored using the modified RADPEER system.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>There were 2,241 cases randomly assigned for peer review. Of selected cases, 1,705 (76%) were interpreted. Reviewing radiologists agreed with prior reports in 99.1% of assessments. Positive feedback (score 0) was given in three cases (0.2%) and concordance (scores of 0 to 2) was assigned in 99.4%, similar to reported rates of 97.0% to 99.8%. Clinically significant discrepancies (scores of 3 or 4) were identified in 10 cases (0.6%). Eighty-eight percent of reviewed radiologists found the reviews worthwhile, 79% found scores appropriate, and 65% felt feedback was appropriate. Two-thirds of radiologists found case rounds discussing significant discrepancies to be valuable.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The workstation-based computerized peer review process used in this pilot project was seamlessly incorporated into the normal workday and met most criteria for an ideal peer review system. Clinically significant discrepancies were identified in 0.6% of cases, similar to published outcomes using the RADPEER system. Reviewed radiologists felt the process was worthwhile.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,4]],"date-time":"2013-07-04T08:11:54Z","timestamp":1372925514000},"update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["A workstation-integrated peer review quality assurance program: pilot study"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"13","author":[{"given":"Margaret M","family":"O\u2019Keeffe","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Todd M","family":"Davis","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Kerry","family":"Siminoski","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"183_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"425","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2010.01.027","volume":"7","author":"JR Steele","year":"2010","unstructured":"Steele JR, Hovsepian DM, Schomer DF: The Joint Commission practice performance evaluation: a primer for radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010, 7: 425-430. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2010.01.027.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"951","DOI":"10.1148\/rg.294095006","volume":"29","author":"CD Johnson","year":"2009","unstructured":"Johnson CD, Krecke KN, Miranda R, et al: Quality initiatives: developing a radiology quality and safety program: a primer. Radiographics. 2009, 29: 951-959. 10.1148\/rg.294095006.","journal-title":"Radiographics"},{"key":"183_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"21","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2008.06.011","volume":"6","author":"VP Jackson","year":"2009","unstructured":"Jackson VP, Cushing T, Abujudeh HH, et al: RADPEER scoring white paper. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009, 6: 21-25. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2008.06.011.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"59","DOI":"10.1016\/S1546-1440(03)00002-4","volume":"1","author":"JP Borgestede","year":"2004","unstructured":"Borgestede JP, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M, et al: RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates. J Am Coll Radiol. 2004, 1: 59-65. 10.1016\/S1546-1440(03)00002-4.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"212","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2003.12.017","volume":"1","author":"DJ Soffa","year":"2004","unstructured":"Soffa DJ, Lewis RS, Sunshine JH, et al: Disagreement in interpretation: a method for the development of benchmarks for quality assurance in imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2004, 1: 212-217. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2003.12.017.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"771","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2473071431","volume":"247","author":"JM Lockyer","year":"2008","unstructured":"Lockyer JM, Violato C, Fidler HM: Assessment of radiologists by a regulatory authority. Radiol. 2008, 247: 771-778. 10.1148\/radiol.2473071431.","journal-title":"Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"769","DOI":"10.1148\/rg.273075914","volume":"27","author":"JL Strife","year":"2007","unstructured":"Strife JL, Kun LE, Becker GJ, et al: American Board of Radiology perspective on maintenance of certification: part IV-practice quality improvement for diagnostic radiology. Radiographics. 2007, 27: 769-774. 10.1148\/rg.273075914.","journal-title":"Radiographics"},{"key":"183_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1183","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.290.9.1183","volume":"290","author":"BE Landon","year":"2003","unstructured":"Landon BE, Norman ST, Blumenthal D, et al: Physician clinical performance assessment. JAMA. 2003, 290: 1183-1189. 10.1001\/jama.290.9.1183.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"183_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"88","DOI":"10.1016\/j.carj.2011.03.001","volume":"62","author":"PL Munk","year":"2011","unstructured":"Munk PL, Forster BB: Accreditation: problem or opportunity?. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2011, 62: 88-89. 10.1016\/j.carj.2011.03.001.","journal-title":"Can Assoc Radiol J"},{"key":"183_CR10","first-page":"271","volume":"56","author":"N Wadden","year":"2005","unstructured":"Wadden N: Breast cancer screening in Canada: a review. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2005, 56: 271-275.","journal-title":"Can Assoc Radiol J"},{"key":"183_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1760","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-005-2662-8","volume":"15","author":"R FitzGerald","year":"2005","unstructured":"FitzGerald R: Radiological error: analysis, standard setting, targeted instruction and teamworking. Eur Radiol. 2005, 15: 1760-1767. 10.1007\/s00330-005-2662-8.","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2010.08.025","volume":"8","author":"JR Steele","year":"2011","unstructured":"Steele JR: The role of RADPEER in the Joint Commission Ongoing Practice Performance Evaluation. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011, 8: 6-7. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2010.08.025.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1221","DOI":"10.1148\/rg.295095086","volume":"29","author":"S Mahgerefteh","year":"2009","unstructured":"Mahgerefteh S, Kruskal JB, Yam CS, et al: Quality initiatives: peer review in diagnostic radiology: current state and a vision for the future. Radiographics. 2009, 29: 1221-1231. 10.1148\/rg.295095086.","journal-title":"Radiographics"},{"key":"183_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"626","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.11102222","volume":"259","author":"DB Larson","year":"2011","unstructured":"Larson DB, Nance JJ: Rethinking peer review: what aviation can teach radiology about performance improvement. Radiol. 2011, 259: 626-672. 10.1148\/radiol.11102222.","journal-title":"Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"984","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2004.06.005","volume":"1","author":"MJ Halsted","year":"2004","unstructured":"Halsted MJ: Radiology peer review as an opportunity to reduce errors and improve patient care. J Am Coll Radiol. 2004, 1: 984-987. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2004.06.005.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1655","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1993.03500130069034","volume":"269","author":"PG Ramsey","year":"1993","unstructured":"Ramsey PG, Wenrich MD, Carline JD, et al: Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance. JAMA. 1993, 269: 1655-1660. 10.1001\/jama.1993.03500130069034.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"183_CR17","unstructured":"American College of Radiologists: Practice of radiology in the US. http:\/\/www.acr.org\/Quality-Safety\/RADPEER. Accessed July 5, 2013"},{"key":"183_CR18","volume-title":"Standards for radiology discrepancy meetings","author":"The Royal College of Radiologists","year":"2007","unstructured":"The Royal College of Radiologists: Standards for radiology discrepancy meetings. 2007, London: The Royal College of Radiologists"},{"key":"183_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1121","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.11.6724","volume":"198","author":"JO Swanson","year":"2012","unstructured":"Swanson JO, Thapa MM, Iyer RS, Otto RK, Weinberger E: Optimizing peer review: A year of experience after instituting a real-time comment-enhanced program at a Children's Hospital. Am J Roentgenol. 2012, 198: 1121-1125. 10.2214\/AJR.11.6724.","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"183_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"265","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.06.5001","volume":"186","author":"R FitzGerald","year":"2006","unstructured":"FitzGerald R: Performance-based assessment of radiology faculty. Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 186: 265-","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"183_CR21","first-page":"29","volume":"4","author":"R Nakielny","year":"2003","unstructured":"Nakielny R: Setting up medical discrepancy meetings \u2013 the practicalities. CME Radiology. 2003, 4: 29-30.","journal-title":"CME Radiology"},{"key":"183_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1320","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.12.8972","volume":"199","author":"LC Bender","year":"2012","unstructured":"Bender LC, Linnau KF, Meier EN, Anzai Y, Gunn ML: Interrater agreement in the evaluation of discrepant imaging findings with the Radpeer system. Am J Roentgenol. 2012, 199: 1320-1327. 10.2214\/AJR.12.8972.","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"183_CR23","first-page":"1320","volume":"199","author":"J Ruma","year":"2011","unstructured":"Ruma J, Klein KA, Chong S, et al: Cross-sectional examination interpretation discrepancies between on-call diagnostic radiology residents and subspecialty faculty radiologists: analysis by imaging modality and subspecialty. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011, 199: 1320-1327.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"162","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2006.09.020","volume":"4","author":"JKT Lee","year":"2007","unstructured":"Lee JKT: Quality-a radiology imperative: interpretation accuracy and pertinence. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007, 4: 162-165. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2006.09.020.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"42","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2241011470","volume":"224","author":"LS Yoon","year":"2002","unstructured":"Yoon LS, Haims AH, Brink JA, et al: Evaluation of an emergency radiology quality assurance program at a level I trauma center: abdominal and pelvic CT studies. Radiology. 2002, 224: 42-46. 10.1148\/radiol.2241011470.","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"183_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1095","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-002-1579-8","volume":"13","author":"EH Tilleman","year":"2003","unstructured":"Tilleman EH, Phoa SS, Van Delden OM, et al: Reinterpretation of radiologic imaging in patients referred to a tertiary referral centre with a suspected pancreatic or hepatobiliary malignancy: impact on treatment strategy. Eur Radiol. 2003, 13: 1095-1099.","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"148","DOI":"10.1016\/S1076-6332(98)80277-8","volume":"5","author":"RL Siegle","year":"1998","unstructured":"Siegle RL, Baram EM, Reuter SR, et al: Rates of disagreement in imaging interpretation in a group of community hospitals. Acad Radiol. 1998, 5: 148-154. 10.1016\/S1076-6332(98)80277-8.","journal-title":"Acad Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"277","DOI":"10.1148\/132.2.277","volume":"132","author":"JT Rhea","year":"1979","unstructured":"Rhea JT, Potsaid MS, DeLuca SA: Errors of interpretation as elicited by a quality audit of an emergency radiology facility. Radiology. 1979, 132: 277-280.","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"183_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"888","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2009.09.009","volume":"6","author":"L Prevedello","year":"2009","unstructured":"Prevedello L, Khorasani R: Enhancing quality assurance and quality control programs: IT tools can help. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009, 6: 888-889. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2009.09.009.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"key":"183_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"264","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2011.11.016","volume":"9","author":"E Maloney","year":"2012","unstructured":"Maloney E, Lomasney LM, Schomer L: Application of the RADPEER scoring language to interpretation discrepancies between diagnostic radiology residents and faculty radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol. 2012, 9: 264-269. 10.1016\/j.jacr.2011.11.016.","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"}],"container-title":["BMC Medical Imaging"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,2]],"date-time":"2021-09-02T00:43:35Z","timestamp":1630543415000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcmedimaging.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,4]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,12]]}},"alternative-id":["183"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2342-13-19","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-2342"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2342","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,4]]},"assertion":[{"value":"20 August 2012","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"26 June 2013","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"4 July 2013","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}}],"article-number":"19"}}