Cited by 48

Malpractice suits in chest radiology: An evaluation of the histories of 8265 radiologists

Baker, Stephen R., Patel, Ronak H., Yang, Lily, Lelkes, Valdis M., Castro, Alejandro·2013·Journal of Thoracic Imaging

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this study was to present rates of claims, causes of error, percentage of cases resulting in a judgment, and average payments made by radiologists in chest-related malpractice cases in a survey of 8265 radiologists. Materials and methods The malpractice histories of 8265 radiologists were evaluated from the credentialing files of One-Call Medical Inc., a preferred provider organization for computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in workers' compensation cases. Results Of the 8265 radiologists, 2680 (32.4%) had at least 1 malpractice suit. Of those who were sued, the rate of claims was 55.1 per 1000 person years. The rate of thorax-related suits was 6.6 claims per 1000 radiology practice years (95% confidence interval, 6.0-7.2). There were 496 suits encompassing 48 different causes. Errors in diagnosis comprised 78.0% of the causes. Failure to diagnose lung cancer was by far the most frequent diagnostic error, representing 211 cases or 42.5%. Of the 496 cases, an outcome was known in 417. Sixty-one percent of these were settled in favor of the plaintiff, with a mean payment of $277,230 (95% confidence interval, 226,967-338,614). Conclusions Errors in diagnosis, and among them failure to diagnose lung cancer, were by far the most common reasons for initiating a malpractice suit against radiologists related to the thorax and its contents.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/rti.0b013e3182a21be2

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baker, S. R., Patel, R. H., Yang, L., Lelkes, V. M., & Castro, A.
Venue
Journal of Thoracic Imaging
Published
2013-11
Volume
28
Issue
6
Pages
388-391
ISSN
0883-5993
Cited by
48
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review