Maintenance of Certification in Radiology: Eliciting Radiologist Preferences Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively assess radiologists' preferences for Maintenance of Certification (MOC) and Continuing Certification (CC) using a survey of attitudes and perceptions. METHODS: A questionnaire that assessed attitudes and perceptions and included a discrete choice or trade-off task was developed by ACR staff in conjunction with an independent market research agency and the Survey Subcommittee of the ACR Task Force on Certification in Radiology. The trade-off exercise was integrated into this methodology to better understand the underlying utilities or preferences of the components of MOC-CC among respondents and to better enable specific recommendations on how to optimize the current program. The survey was administered via e-mail to 17,305 ACR members. The demographic and practice characteristics of the 1,994 (11.5%) respondents were similar to the ACR radiologist membership and correspond to a normal distribution. At a 95% confidence level, with a margin of error 2.1%, we believe that the respondent population fairly reflects the actual population. RESULTS: Similar proportions judged the existing program as excellent or very good (36%), or fair or poor (35%), with 27% neutral. MOC-CC was perceived more often as excellent or very good by those who were grandfathered yet still participating in MOC, were in academic practice, were in an urban setting, were older, or had a role with the ABR. In contrast, MOC-CC was more often judged as fair or poor by those who were not grandfathered, were in private practice, were in a rural setting, or were younger. The current MOC-CC program is not well regarded by diplomates, with few showing preference or acceptability. The program's reception is most sensitive to the following attributes: absence or presence of a practice quality improvement requirement, Online Longitudinal Assessment content including or excluding general radiology in addition to one's specialty and inclusion or exclusion of self-assessment as part of the CME. CONCLUSION: ACR members diverged in their attitudes toward MOC, with differences among specific demographic and practice characteristics. The current package of features of MOC-CC was widely viewed as unsatisfactory, and a more optimal feature set arose from a simulation exercise.

Integration of Art Into Radiological Societies & Educational Conferences: Early Experiences of the 2021 ACR Art Task Force.

Interest in incorporating art into radiology has been growing in recent years. Radiological societies have begun to acknowledge the benefits art can bring to our field. Given this growing interest, a task force was created in 2021 to carry out integration of the arts into the annual American College of Radiology (ACR) meeting. Experiences of this task force are described, including consideration of benefits of integrating art in radiology practice and education as well as strategies, outcomes, and future directions for melding arts with radiology.

Managing Incidental Findings on Thoracic CT: Lung Findings. A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee presents recommendations for managing incidentally detected lung findings on thoracic CT. The Chest Subcommittee is composed of thoracic radiologists who endorsed and developed the provided guidance. These recommendations represent a combination of current published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by informal iterative consensus. The recommendations address commonly encountered incidental findings in the lungs and are not intended to be a comprehensive review of all pulmonary incidental findings. The goal is to improve the quality of care by providing guidance on management of incidentally detected thoracic findings.

Use of a Dual Artificial Intelligence Platform to Detect Unreported Lung Nodules.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the performance of Dual-AI Deep Learning Platform in detecting unreported pulmonary nodules that are 6 mm or greater, comprising computer-vision (CV) algorithm to detect pulmonary nodules, with positive results filtered by natural language processing (NLP) analysis of the dictated report. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 5047 chest CT scans and corresponding reports. Cases which were both CV algorithm positive (nodule ≥ 6 mm) and NLP negative (nodule not reported), were outputted for review by 2 chest radiologists. RESULTS: The CV algorithm detected nodules that are 6 mm or greater in 1830 (36.3%) of 5047 cases. Three hundred fifty-five (19.4%) were unreported by the radiologist, as per NLP algorithm. Expert review determined that 139 (39.2%) of 355 cases were true positives (2.8% of all cases). One hundred thirty (36.7%) of 355 cases were unnecessary alerts-vague language in the report confounded the NLP algorithm. Eighty-six (24.2%) of 355 cases were false positives. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-AI platform detected actionable unreported nodules in 2.8% of chest CT scans, yet minimized intrusion to radiologist's workflow by avoiding alerts for most already-reported nodules.

Management of Incidental Adnexal Findings on CT and MRI: A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee (IFC) presents recommendations for managing adnexal masses incidentally detected on CT and MRI. These recommendations represent an update of those provided in our previous JACR 2013 white paper. The Adnexal Subcommittee, which included six radiologists with subspecialty expertise in abdominal imaging or ultrasound and one gynecologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by iterative consensus. Algorithm branches successively categorize adnexal masses based on patient characteristics (eg, pre- versus postmenopausal) and imaging features. They terminate with a management recommendation. The algorithm addresses most, but not all, pathologies and clinical scenarios. Our goal is to improve quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected adnexal masses.

Diagnostic Radiologists' Participation in the American Board of Radiology Maintenance of Certification Program.

OBJECTIVE. Physicians across specialties have expressed concerns about Maintenance of Certification (MOC) programs of American Board of Medical Specialties member boards, calling for research about MOC acceptance, adoption, and value. The purpose of this study was to characterize diagnostic radiologists' participation in the American Board of Radiology (ABR) MOC program, the framework for its new Online Longitudinal Assessment program. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Practicing U.S. radiologists were identified from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File. Corresponding ABR diplomate certification information was obtained through the ABR public search engine. Focused on diagnostic radiologists (defined as those whose only ABR certificate is in diagnostic radiology), MOC participation rates were calculated across various physician characteristics for those whose participation was mandated by the ABR (time-limited certificates) and for those whose participation was not mandated (lifetime certificates). RESULTS. Among 20,354 included diagnostic radiologists, 11,479 (56.4%) participated in MOC. Participation rates were 99.6% (10,058/10,099) among those whose MOC was ABR mandated and 13.9% (1421/10,225) among those whose participation was not mandated (p < 0.001). The rates of nonmandated participation were higher (all p < 0.001) for academic than for non-academic radiologists (28.0% vs 11.3%), subspecialists than for generalists (17.0% vs 11.5%), and those in larger practice groups (< 10 members, 5.0%; 10-49 members, 12.6%; ≥ 50 members, 20.7%). State-level rates of nonmandated participation varied from 0.0% (South Dakota, Montana) to 32.6% (Virginia) and positively correlated with state population density (r = 0.315). CONCLUSION. Although diagnostic radiologists with time-limited certificates nearly universally participate in MOC, those with lifetime certificates (particularly general radiologists and those in smaller and nonacademic practices) participate infrequently. Low rates of nonmandated participation may reflect diplomate dissatisfaction or negative perceptions about MOC.

Relationships Between Health Care Disparities and Coverage Policies for Breast, Colon, and Lung Cancer Screening.

Disparities in outcomes exist for breast, colon, and lung cancer among diverse populations, particularly racial and ethnic underrepresented minorities (URMs) and individuals from lower socioeconomic status. For example, blacks experience mortality rates up to about 42% higher than whites for these cancers. Furthermore, although overall death rates have been declining, the differential access to screening and care has aggravated disparities. Our purpose is to assess how the coverage policies of CMS and the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) influence these disparities. Additionally, barriers are often encountered in accessing screening tests and receiving prompt treatment. To narrow, and potentially eliminate, outcomes disparities, CMS and USPSTF could consider revising their decision-making processes regarding coverage. Some options include (1) extending their evidence base to include observational studies that involve groups at higher risk; (2) lowering the threshold ages for screening to encompass differences in incidence; (3) CMS approving screening CT colonography coverage, which can even increase compliance with other screening tests; (4) clarifying and streamlining guidelines; (5) supporting research on improving access to screening; and (6) encouraging the development of more navigation services for URMs.

Testing for Verification Bias in Reported Malignancy Risks for Side-Branch Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms: A Simulation Modeling Approach.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to test for the possibility that published malignancy risks for side-branch intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are overestimates, likely due to verification bias. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We tested for possible verification bias using simulation modeling techniques. First, in age-defined hypothetical cohorts of 10 million persons, we projected the frequency of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) arising from side-branch IPMNs over 5 years using published estimates of their prevalence (4.4%) and rate of malignant transformation (1.9%). Second, we projected the total number of PDAC cases in corresponding cohorts over the same time horizon using national cancer registry data. For each cohort, we determined whether the percentage of all PDAC cases that arose from side-branch IPMNs (i.e., side-branch IPMN-associated PDAC cases) was clinically plausible using an upper limit of 10% to define plausibility, as estimated from the literature. Model assumptions and parameter uncertainty were evaluated in sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Across all cohorts, percentages of side-branch IPMN-associated PDACs greatly exceeded 10%. In the base case (mean age = 55.7 years), 80% of PDAC cases arose from side-branch IPMNs (7877/9786). In the oldest cohort evaluated (mean age = 75 years), this estimate was 76% (14,227/18,714). In a secondary analysis, we found that if an upper limit threshold of 10% for side-branch IPMN-associated PDAC was imposed, the model-predicted rate of malignancy for side-branch IPMNs would be less than 0.24% over a 5-year time horizon, substantially lower than most literature-based estimates. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that reported malignancy risks associated with side-branch IPMNs are likely to be overestimates and imply the presence of verification bias.

Navigating Uncertainty in the Management of Incidental Findings.

The lack of prospective outcomes studies for many types of incidental findings limits our understanding of both their natural history and the potential efficacy of treatment. To support decision making for the management of incidental findings, major sources of uncertainty in management pathways can be mapped and analyzed using mathematical models. This process yields important insights into how uncertainty influences the best treatment decision. Here, we consider a classification scheme, grounded in decision science, which exposes various levels and types of uncertainty in the management of incidental findings and addresses (1) disease-related risks, which are considered in context of a patient's competing causes of mortality; (2) potential degrees of intervention; (3) strength of evidence; and (4) patients' treatment-related preferences. Herein we describe how categorizing uncertainty by the sources, issues, and locus can build a framework from which to improve the management of incidental findings. Accurate and comprehensive handling of uncertainty will improve the quality of related decision making and will help guide future research priorities.

Managing Incidental Findings on Thoracic CT: Mediastinal and Cardiovascular Findings. A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee presents recommendations for managing incidentally detected mediastinal and cardiovascular findings found on CT. The Chest Subcommittee was composed of thoracic radiologists who developed the provided guidance. These recommendations represent a combination of current published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by informal iterative consensus. The recommendations address the most commonly encountered mediastinal and cardiovascular incidental findings and are not intended to be a comprehensive review of all incidental findings associated with these compartments. Our goal is to improve the quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected thoracic findings.

Management of Incidental Pituitary Findings on CT, MRI, and 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET: A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee presents recommendations for managing pituitary findings that are incidentally detected on CT, MRI and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. The Pituitary Subcommittee, which included radiologists practicing neuroradiology and an endocrinologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by informal iterative consensus. Algorithm branches successively categorize pituitary findings on the basis of imaging features. They terminate with an ascertainment of an indolent lesion (with sufficient confidence to discontinue follow-up) or a management recommendation. The algorithm addresses most, but not all, pathologies and clinical scenarios. The goal is to improve the quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected pituitary findings.

ABR Psychometric Testing: Analysis of Validity and Effects.

Changes in the certification program of the ABR were first described in some detail in 2008 and have since undergone refinements. Controversies surrounding these changes have included the relevance of test questions, costs, effects of altering the examination scheduling, residency program curriculum changes, and issues related to preparing for the examinations. However, the role of psychometric testing in radiology itself, as the technical foundation for the new ABR Core and Certification Examinations, has undergone less scrutiny. This article examines the validity and consequences of the ABR psychometric testing process, and we conclude that its validity can be challenged and that negative consequences, including adverse effects on allocating human and financial resources and on what is taught and learned in residency programs, should be addressed. The ABR could collaborate with the ACGME, education experts, patients, and public representatives to reform their testing processes, especially by integrating modern evaluation techniques that more authentically simulate radiology practices to better align the examination with its intended purposes.

Imaging Follow-up of Low-Risk Incidental Pancreas and Kidney Findings: Effects of Patient Age and Comorbidity on Projected Life Expectancy.

Purpose To determine the effects of patient age and comorbidity level on life expectancy (LE) benefits associated with imaging follow-up of Bosniak IIF renal cysts and pancreatic side-branch (SB) intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). Materials and Methods A decision-analytic Markov model to evaluate LE benefits was developed. Hypothetical cohorts with varied age (60-80 years) and comorbidities (none, mild, moderate, or severe) were evaluated. For each finding, LE projections from two strategies were compared: imaging follow-up and no imaging follow-up. Under follow-up, it was assumed that cancers associated with the incidental finding were successfully treated before they spread. For patients without follow-up, mortality risks from Bosniak IIF cysts (renal cell carcinoma) and SBIPMNs (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma) were incorporated. Model assumptions and parameter uncertainty were evaluated in sensitivity analysis. Results In the youngest, healthiest cohorts (age, 60 years; no comorbidities), projected LE benefits from follow-up were as follows: Bosniak IIF cyst, 6.5 months (women) and 5.8 months (men); SBIPMN, 6.4 months (women) and 5.3 months (men). Follow-up of Bosniak IIF cysts in 60-year-old women with severe comorbidities yielded a LE benefit of 3.9 months; in 80-year-old women with no comorbidities, the benefit was 2.8 months, and with severe comorbidities the benefit was 1.5 months. Similar trends were observed in men and for SBIPMN. Results were sensitive to the performance of follow-up for cancer detection; malignancy risks; and stage at presentation of malignant, unfollowed Bosniak IIF cysts. Conclusion With progression of age and comorbidity level, follow-up of low-risk incidental findings yields increasingly limited benefits for patients. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Management of the Incidental Renal Mass on CT: A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee (IFC) presents recommendations for renal masses that are incidentally detected on CT. These recommendations represent an update from the renal component of the JACR 2010 white paper on managing incidental findings in the adrenal glands, kidneys, liver, and pancreas. The Renal Subcommittee, consisting of six abdominal radiologists and one urologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by informal iterative consensus. Each flowchart within the algorithm describes imaging features that identify when there is a need for additional imaging, surveillance, or referral for management. Our goal is to improve quality of care by providing guidance for managing incidentally detected renal masses.