Objective: To measure recall of structured compared with unstructured radiology reports.
Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained. Four hypothetical radiology reports, two structured and two unstructured reports, were created for the purposes of this study by an experienced consultant radiologist. The reports, each followed immediately by a multiple-choice questionnaire listing possible diagnoses from the report, were distributed to the members of two national physician associations using a web-based survey tool. Based on the number of correct responses, correct critical findings and incorrect responses, rates per number of potential diagnoses were calculated for each individual and averaged. The paired sign test compared results between structured and unstructured reports.
Results: 148 respondents completed the survey, 126 (85.1%) of whom were physicians. The mean percentage of incorrect diagnoses was 4.5% for structured reports compared with 16.7% for unstructured reports (p < 0.001). The average rate of critical diagnosis recall was 82.7% for structured reports and 65.1% for unstructured reports (p < 0.001). The average percentage of all diagnoses detected for structured compared with unstructured reports was 64.3 and 59.0%, respectively (p = 0.007).
Conclusion: Recall of structured radiology reports is significantly superior to recall of unstructured reports immediately after reading the report. Advances in knowledge: A structured radiology report format can positively impact the referring clinician's ability to recall the critical findings with statistically significance.