首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Quantitative Metrics in Clinical Radiology Reporting: A Snapshot Perspective from a Single Mixed Academic-Community Practice
【2h】

Quantitative Metrics in Clinical Radiology Reporting: A Snapshot Perspective from a Single Mixed Academic-Community Practice

机译:定量指标在临床放射学报告:从单一的混合研究机构和社区实践的一个视角快照

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Quantitative imaging has emerged as a leading priority on the imaging research agenda, yet clinical radiology has traditionally maintained a skeptical attitude toward numerical measurement in diagnostic interpretation. To gauge the extent to which quantitative reporting has been incorporated into routine clinical radiology practice, and to offer preliminary baseline data against which the evolution of quantitative imaging can be measured, we obtained all clinical computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports from two randomly selected weekdays in 2011 at a single mixed academic-community practice and evaluated those reports for the presence of quantitative descriptors. We found that 44% of all reports contained at least one “quantitative metric” (QM), defined as any numerical descriptor of a physical property other than quantity, but only 2% of reports contained an “advanced quantitative metric” (AQM), defined as a numerical parameter reporting on lesion function or composition, excluding simple size and distance measurements. Possible reasons for the slow translation of AQMs into routine clinical radiology reporting include perceptions that the primary clinical question may be qualitative in nature or that a qualitative answer may be sufficient; concern that quantitative approaches may obscure important qualitative information, may not be adequately validated, or may not allow sufficient expression of uncertainty; the feeling that “gestalt” interpretation may be superior to quantitative paradigms; and practical workflow limitations. We suggest that quantitative imaging techniques will evolve primarily as dedicated instruments for answering specific clinical questions requiring precise and standardized interpretation. Validation in real-world settings, ease of use, and reimbursement economics will all play a role in determining the rate of translation of AQMs into broad practice.
机译:定量成像已成为成像研究议程中的头等大事,但是临床放射学传统上一直对诊断解释中的数值测量持怀疑态度。为了评估将定量报告纳入常规临床放射学实践的程度,并提供可以测量定量成像演变的初步基线数据,我们获得了所有临床计算机断层扫描(CT)和磁共振成像(MRI)该报告来自2011年在一个单一的学术社区实践中从两个随机选择的工作日中获得的报告,并评估了这些报告中是否存在定量描述符。我们发现,所有报告中有44%包含至少一个“量化指标”(QM),定义为除数量以外的任何物理性质的数字描述子,但只有2%的报告包含“高级定量指标”(AQM),定义为报告病变功能或成分的数字参数,不包括简单的尺寸和距离测量。将AQM缓慢转换为常规临床放射学报告的可能原因包括:主要的临床问题本质上可能是定性的,或者定性的回答可能就足够了;担心定量方法可能掩盖重要的定性信息,可能未得到充分验证或可能无法充分表达不确定性;感觉“格式塔”解释可能优于定量范式;和实际的工作流程限制。我们建议定量成像技术将主要发展为专用工具,用于回答需要精确和标准化解释的特定临床问题。实际环境中的验证,易用性和报销经济学将在确定AQM转换为广泛实践的比率方面发挥作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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