Using an Automated Coding and Review Process to Communicate Critical Radiologic Findings: One Way to Skin a Cat
Abstract
Using an Automated Coding and Review Process to Communicate Critical Radiologic Findings: One Way to Skin a CatLeonard BerlinAudio Available | Share
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Achieving high standards of patient safety through the use of IT also entails system redesign to include formal policies and procedures regarding the use of IT.
“Thus, achieving high standards of patient safety through the use of IT also entails system redesign to include formal policies and procedures regarding the use of IT.43–47”
From Reducing Diagnostic Errors through Effective Communication: Harnessing the Power of Information Technology (2008) · cites this paper as [47]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 20 · Cited by 14
- Authors
- Berlin, L.
- Affiliations
- Rush University Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Berlin, Leonard
- ORCID
- Berlin, Leonard
- Venue
- American Journal of Roentgenology
- Publisher
- American Roentgen Ray Society
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 185
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 840-843
- ISSN
- 0002-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 0361-803X
- 1546-3141
- OpenAlex
- W2072657078
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Roentgenology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- automated coding, radiology workflow
- MeSH terms
- Computer Communication Networks, Database Management Systems, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Malpractice, Radiology, Radiology Information Systems, Referral and Consultation, Software, United States
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
