Radiologic quality and safety: mapping value into radiology.

[1]  P Vock,et al.  [Frequent errors in the interpretation of chest x-ray films]. , 1987, Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift.

[2]  U. Reinhardt,et al.  It's the prices, stupid: why the United States is so different from other countries. , 2003, Health affairs.

[3]  J. Lancaster,et al.  Rates of disagreement in imaging interpretation in a group of community hospitals. , 1998, Academic radiology.

[4]  R G Swensson,et al.  Improving performance by multiple interpretations of chest radiographs: effectiveness and cost. , 1978, Radiology.

[5]  Marlys K. Christianson,et al.  Managing the unexpected , 2001 .

[6]  P. Robinson.  Short communication: plain film reporting by radiographers--a feasibility study. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  K. Kahn,et al.  Information content and clarity of radiologists' reports for chest radiography. , 1996, Academic radiology.

[8]  S. Ethell,et al.  Accident and emergency and general practitioner plain radiograph reporting by radiographers and radiologists: a quasi-randomized controlled trial. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[9]  S. Somers,et al.  Double-contrast barium enema studies: effect of multiple reading on perception error. , 1990, Radiology.

[10]  R. J. Brenner,et al.  Medicolegal aspects of breast imaging. , 1992, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[11]  Karl E. Weick,et al.  Managing the unexpected: Assuring high performance in an age of complexity. , 2001 .

[12]  Emily F Conant,et al.  Evaluation of proscriptive health care policy implementation in screening mammography. , 2003, Radiology.

[13]  R J Brenner,et al.  Medicolegal aspects of breast imaging: variable standards of care relating to different types of practice. , 1991, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  T. Cubitt.  LITHIUM AND THYROTOXICOSIS , 1976, The Lancet.

[15]  B J Hillman,et al.  Radiology reporting: attitudes of referring physicians. , 1988, Radiology.

[16]  O. Eden,et al.  Inter-Observer Variation in Interpretation of Chest X-Rays , 1990, Scottish medical journal.

[17]  O. Linton,et al.  Comparison of "B" readers' interpretations of chest radiographs for asbestos related changes. , 2004, Academic radiology.

[18]  J. Yerushalmy,et al.  The Role of Dual Reading in Mass Radiography1,2 , 1950 .

[19]  Ramin Khorasani,et al.  Is terminology used effectively to convey diagnostic certainty in radiology reports? , 2003, Academic radiology.

[20]  P R Goddard,et al.  Audit of the value of double reading magnetic resonance imaging films. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.

[21]  R. Gottlieb,et al.  The New Yorker , 1987 .

[22]  A. Scally,et al.  Bias in plain film reading performance studies. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[23]  J. Bloem,et al.  Quantitative analysis of focal masses at MR imaging: a plea for standardization. , 2004, Radiology.

[24]  Lisa Rogers,et al.  Overview, History, and Objectives of Performance Measurement , 2001, Health care financing review.

[25]  Dual reading in a non-specialized breast cancer screening programme , 1996 .

[26]  Susan A. Caldwell,et al.  The completeness of existing lexicons for representing radiology report information. , 2002, Journal of digital imaging.

[27]  T. Brennan,et al.  INCIDENCE OF ADVERSE EVENTS AND NEGLIGENCE IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS , 2008 .

[28]  B. Mallon.  Ernest Amory Codman: The End Result of a Life in Medicine , 2000 .

[29]  J. Thrall.  The emerging role of pay-for-performance contracting for health care services. , 2004, Radiology.

[30]  P. Goddard,et al.  Error in radiology. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[31]  Thomas O. Staiger,et al.  Rapid magnetic resonance imaging vs radiographs for patients with low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. , 2003, JAMA.

[32]  A K Dixon,et al.  Communication of doubt and certainty in radiological reports. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[33]  J. V. van Engelshoven,et al.  Miss rate of lung cancer on the chest radiograph in clinical practice. , 1999, Chest.

[34]  A. Wall,et al.  Book ReviewTo Err is Human: building a safer health system Kohn L T Corrigan J M Donaldson M S Washington DC USA: Institute of Medicine/National Academy Press ISBN 0 309 06837 1 $34.95 , 2000 .

[35]  C. Beam,et al.  Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample. , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[36]  Wilbur L. Smith,et al.  The role of previous radiographs and reports in the interpretation of current radiographs. , 1993 .

[37]  P. Robinson,et al.  Radiology's Achilles' heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Röntgen image. , 1997, The British journal of radiology.

[38]  R. Fitzgerald.  Error in radiology. , 2001, Clinical radiology.

[39]  D M Berwick,et al.  Not again! , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[40]  R. Johnston,et al.  Reducing observer error in a 70-mm. chestradiography service for general practitioners. , 1955, Lancet.

[41]  L. Kohn,et al.  To Err Is Human : Building a Safer Health System , 2007 .

[42]  M. Lafortune,et al.  The radiological report: what is useful for the referring physician? , 1988, Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes.

[43]  P R Goddard,et al.  The influence of clinical information on the reporting of CT by radiologists. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[44]  B. Muir,et al.  The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. , 1994, Clinical radiology.

[45]  R. Bird.  Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programs. , 1990, Radiology.

[46]  A Hanbidge,et al.  Radiology reports: examining radiologist and clinician preferences regarding style and content. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[47]  S. Brealey.  Measuring the effects of image interpretation: an evaluative framework. , 2001, Clinical radiology.