Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Apr;32(4):2837-2854.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08327-5. Epub 2021 Oct 15.

Structured reporting in radiology: a systematic review to explore its potential

J Martijn Nobel  1   2 , Koos van Geel  3   4 , Simon G F Robben  5   3
Affiliations

Structured reporting in radiology: a systematic review to explore its potential

J Martijn Nobel et al. Eur Radiol. 2022 Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology reporting is suggested to be a promising tool in clinical practice. In order to implement such an emerging innovation, it is necessary to verify that radiology reporting can benefit from SR. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to explore the level of evidence of structured reporting in radiology. Additionally, this review provides an overview on the current status of SR in radiology.

Methods: A narrative systematic review was conducted, searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using the syntax 'radiol*' AND 'structur*' AND 'report*'. Structured reporting was divided in SR level 1, structured layout (use of templates and checklists), and SR level 2, structured content (a drop-down menu, point-and-click or clickable decision trees). Two reviewers screened the search results and included all quantitative experimental studies that discussed SR in radiology. A thematic analysis was performed to appraise the evidence level.

Results: The search resulted in 63 relevant full text articles out of a total of 8561 articles. Thematic analysis resulted in 44 SR level 1 and 19 level 2 reports. Only one paper was scored as highest level of evidence, which concerned a double cohort study with randomized trial design.

Conclusion: The level of evidence for implementing SR in radiology is still low and outcomes should be interpreted with caution.

Key points: • Structured reporting is increasingly being used in radiology, especially in abdominal and neuroradiological CT and MRI reports. • SR can be subdivided into structured layout (SR level 1) and structured content (SR level 2), in which the first is defined as being a template in which the reporter has to report; the latter is an IT-based manner in which the content of the radiology report can be inserted and displayed into the report. • Despite the extensive amount of research on the subject of structured reporting, the level of evidence is low.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging; Multidetector computed tomography; Neoplasm staging; Radiology; Reports.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Examples of different levels of structured reporting. SR level 1, structured layout: itemized, itemized-checklist; in these examples, the obligated items or possible options are already stated in the template to ensure its presence. SR level 2, structured content: drop-down menu, point-and-click/pick list; these are examples of IT-based tools to insert specific textual items into the radiological report, for instance with the use of a drop-down menu in which an option can be chosen out of a particular list, or by using a point-and-click/pick list which in turn can open a new point-and-click/pick list option in order to build the report
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Search flow chart. SR, structured reporting
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Characteristics of included studies based on SR level. SR level 1, structured layout; SR level 2, structured content
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Intervention based on SR level. SR level 1, structured layout; SR level 2, structured content
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
a Subspecialty based on SR level and (b) modality used based on SR level. All included single intervention studies according to the field of specialty and modality used. SR level 1, structured layout; SR level 2, structured content; DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Level of evidence based on SR level. Level A, level A evidence according to Siwek et al. [13]; SR level 1, structured layout; SR level 2, structured content
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Liu D, Zucherman M, Tulloss WB., Jr Six characteristics of effective structured reporting and the inevitable integration with speech recognition. J Digit Imaging. 2006;19:98–104. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reiner BI. The challenges, opportunities, and imperative of structured reporting in medical imaging. J Digit Imaging. 2009;22:562–568. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Powell DK, Silberzweig JE. state of structured reporting in radiology, a survey. Acad Radiol. 2015;22:226–33. - PubMed
    1. Radiological Society of North America (2020) RadReport template library. Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook (IL), USA. Available via https://radreport.org. Accessed 15 Dec 2020.
    1. European Society of Radiology (ESR) ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology. Insights Imaging. 2018;9:1–7. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types