The Experts below are selected from a list of 961524 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Martin Valcke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Results of a survey by the European Society of Radiology (ESR): undergraduate Radiology education in Europe—influences of a modern teaching approach
Insights into Imaging, 2012Co-Authors: Elena Oris, Koenraad Verstraete, Martin ValckeAbstract:Objectives The purpose of the present study is to determine in what way a conventional versus a modern medical curriculum influences teaching delivery in formal Radiology education. Methods A web-based questionnaire was distributed by the ESR to Radiology teaching staff from 93 European teaching institutions. Results Early exposure to Radiology in pre-clinical years is typically reported in institutions with a modern curriculum. The average number of teaching hours related to Radiology is similar in both curriculum types (60 h). Radiology in modern curricula is mainly taught by radiologists, Radiology trainees (50%), radiographers (20%) or clinicians (17%). Mandatory clerkships are pertinent to modern curricula (55% vs. 41% conventional curriculum), which start in the first (13% vs. 4% conventional curriculum) or second year of the training (9% vs. 2% conventional curriculum). The common core in both curricula consists of Radiology examinations, to work with Radiology teaching files, to attend Radiology conferences, and to participate in multidisciplinary meetings. Conclusion The influence of a modern curriculum on the formal Radiology teaching is visible in terms of earlier exposure to Radiology, involvement of a wider range of staff grades and range of profession involved in teaching, and Radiology clerkships with more active and integrated tasks. Main Message • This study looks at differences in the nature of formal Radiology teaching.
-
Radiological clerkships as a critical curriculum component in Radiology education.
European journal of radiology, 2010Co-Authors: Elena V. Kourdioukova, Koenraad Verstraete, Martin ValckeAbstract:Abstract Objective The aim of this research was to explore the perceived value of clinical clerkships in the Radiology curriculum as well as the impact of Radiology clerkship on students’ beliefs about the profession of Radiology as a whole and as a career. Methods This study is a sequel to a previous survey in which student perceptions about Radiology curriculum components were investigated. The present study focuses on a further analysis of a subsection in this study, based on 14 statements about Radiology clerkship and two statements about Radiology as a career. Results Perceived usefulness of the aspects of Radiology clerkship as “Radiology examination”, “skills development” and “diagnosis focus” were awarded the highest scores. The predict value of the subscale “Radiology examination” on the level of performance was very high (adjusted R2 = 0.19, p Conclusion Students expressed highly favorable evaluation of clerkship as a learning environment to learn to order and to interpret imaging studies as well as an unique possibility to attend various radiological examinations and to access to specific Radiology software systems, as well as to get a better view on Radiology and to improve image interpretation skills. This positive attitude towards clerkship is closely tied to students’ beliefs about the profession of Radiology as a whole. These aspects of dedicated Radiology clerkship are crucial for effective and high-quality education as well as for the choice of Radiology as a career.
Dheeraj K Rajan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
quality improvement guidelines for preventing wrong site wrong procedure and wrong person errors application of the joint commission universal protocol for preventing wrong site wrong procedure wrong person surgery to the practice of interventional r
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2008Co-Authors: John F Angle, Albert A Nemcek, Alan M Cohen, Donald L Miller, Clement J Grassi, Horacio Dagostino, Arshad Ahmed Khan, Sanjoy Kundu, Robert B Osnis, Dheeraj K RajanAbstract:From the Department of Radiology (J.F.A.), Univ sity of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, V ginia; Department of Radiology (A.A.N.), Nor western Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Illino Department of Vascular and Interventional Radi ogy (A.M.C.), University of Texas–Houston; Depa ment of Interventional Radiology (M.J.W.), The U versity of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Cen Houston, Texas; Department of Radiology (D.L.M Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, Mar land; Department of Radiology (C.J.G.), Bost Healthcare System/Veterans Affairs Medical Ce ter, Boston; Department of Radiology (J.F.C.), B state Health System, Springfield, Massachusetts; D partment of Radiology (H.A.D.), Louisiana Sta University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Lo isiana; Department of Interventional Radiolog (A.A.K.), Washington Hospital, Bethesda, Mar land; Department of Medical Imaging (S.K.), Scarborough General Hospital, Richmond Hill; Division represent a valid broad expert consti ency of the subject matter under cons eration for standards production. Technical documents specifying th exact consensus and literature revie methodologies as well as the insti tional affiliations and professional cr dentials of the authors of this do ment are available upon request fro SIR, 3975 Fair Ridge Dr., Suite 4 Fairfax, VA 22033.
G D Dodd 3rd - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Medical student Radiology education: summary and recommendations from a national survey of medical school and Radiology department leadership
Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2014Co-Authors: C M Straus, A. W. Phillips, E M Webb, K L Kondo, David M. Naeger, C W Carrico, J A Neutze, G R Haines, William Herring, G D Dodd 3rdAbstract:The ACR Task Force on Medical Student Education in Radiology, in partnership with the Alliance of Medical Student Educators in Radiology, investigated the current status of how and to what extent medical imaging was being taught in medical schools. The task force executed a 3-part survey of medical school deans, Radiology department chairs, and intern physicians. The results provided an updated understanding of the status of Radiology education in medical schools in the United States. This summary includes recommendations about how individual Radiology departments and ACR members can assist in advancing the specialty of diagnostic Radiology through medical student education.
Richard B. Gunderman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Dementia Care in Radiology
AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2019Co-Authors: Lily K. Wolf, Richard B. GundermanAbstract:OBJECTIVE. Much of the Radiology literature on dementia naturally focuses on the use of imaging for diagnosis. However, dementia presents other important challenges for Radiology. One of the most important stems from the projected large increase in the number of patients with dementia who will be presenting for care in Radiology departments. CONCLUSION. It is important, and increasingly so, that patient-facing Radiology personnel understand dementia and the special needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers.
-
Teaching Radiology in medical school: an association for medical student educators in Radiology survey.
Academic radiology, 2013Co-Authors: Lyndsay Oancea, Richard B. Gunderman, Caroline Carrico, Christopher M. StrausAbstract:T he presence of Radiology and radiologists in medical school curricula is important for many reasons. Future physicians must learn how to use medical imaging effectively and efficiently for better patient care. Additionally, if medical students are not specifically trained in or exposed to Radiology during their coursework, they may not have adequate opportunity to consider Radiology as a career option. Finally, teaching Radiology to medical students provides an excellent opportunity for radiologists to develop a positive reputation and to form strong collaborative relationships between Radiology and other medical specialties. As a first step in attempting to enhance the profile of Radiology in the curricula of US medical schools, it is important to define its current status. Toward this end, we conducted a survey of the membership of the Association for Medical Student Educators in Radiology. The survey consisted of a 22-question instrument, with both multiple-choice and open-ended items. Requests to complete the survey were sent out in January and April 2012, and a total of 83 responses were received. Many respondents did not state which institution they were affiliated with, and duplicate responses were received from at least 3 institutions. This brief report summarizes the results. Responding to the question, ‘‘Does your medical school have a required Radiology course?’’ 43% of the respondents indicated that their institution has at least one required course in Radiology, whereas 57% do not. Because this surveywas sent only to Association for Medical Student Educators in Radiology members, it is highly likely that the actual percentage of all schools requiring a Radiology course is lower. Also, responses to this question may underestimate the role Radiology is playing in medical school curricula, because medical students can receive high-quality Radiology education outside of required Radiology courses.
-
The 2006 ACR Forum: cardiovascular imaging: learning from the past, strategies for the future.
Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2007Co-Authors: Richard B. Gunderman, James P. Borgstede, Jeffrey C. Weinreb, Bruce J. Hilman, Harvey L. NeimanAbstract:This paper summarizes the 2006 ACR Forum, which explored the history of the relationship between Radiology and cardiovascular imaging and sought to explore strategies by which Radiology could cope with similar challenges in the future. Key topics include: competition between Radiology and other medical specialties, the importance of cardiac imaging, the relative merits of cardiologists and radiologists as cardiovascular imagers, and specific recommendations for Radiology leaders in the areas of education, research, clinical practice, and policy.
-
Leadership in Radiology
Academic radiology, 1999Co-Authors: Richard B. GundermanAbstract:The futures of both individual Radiology departments and the specialty of Radiology as a whole hinge on the quality of leadership they enjoy. Despite the immense importance of leadership to the prosperity of every Radiology organization, relatively little formal attention has been paid to the subject of leadership in Radiology research, education, and practice (1). For example, most Radiology residency programs devote thousands of hours of training to many facets of the diagnostic process, yet little or no time is explicitly devoted to the development of the next generation of leaders in diagnostic imaging. The dearth of leadership education in Radiology is especially lamentable in view of the fact that over the past several decades social science research has shed considerable light on the subject of leadership (2). In this era of rapid and sweeping health care system change, Radiology can continue to neglect such insights only at its own peril. The goal of this article is to explore some of the more important findings of research on leadership over the past 50 years and to extrapolate some of their potential applications in Radiology. It should be noted that this discussion touches only lightly on the direction of leadership--that is, the goals that leaders within Radiology are or should be pursuing--and focuses instead on the formal characteristics of effective leadership. In that respect, this discussion could be criticized as excessively formalistic, overemphasizing the style of leadership at the expense of substance. However, this approach comports with the focus of most recent research, which tends to define leadership as a pro-
Sanjoy Kundu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
practice guideline for adult antibiotic prophylaxis during vascular and interventional Radiology procedures
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2010Co-Authors: Aradhana M Venkatesan, Sanjoy Kundu, David Sacks, Michael J Wallace, Joan C Wojak, Steven C Rose, Timothy Clark, Janne B Dothee, Maxim Itkin, Robert S JonesAbstract:From the Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences (A.M.V.), National Institutes of Health Clinical Center; Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences (D.L.M.), Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences; Department of Radiology (D.L.M.), National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda; Department of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology (B.J.D.), University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Medical Imaging (S.K.), Scarborough General Hospital; Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Medical Imaging (D.K.R.), University of Toronto, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Interventional Radiology (D.S.) and Section of Infectious Diseases (R.S.J.), Reading Hospital and Medical Center, West Reading; Department of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology (M.I.), University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia; Department of Radiology (J.F.C.), Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania; Department of Interventional Radiology (M.J.W.), The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiology (J.C.W.), Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center, Lafayette, Louisiana; Department of Radiology (S.C.R.), University of California San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, California; Department of Intercomplications from nosocomial infection. This document summarizes the findings from the available surgical and IR literature on this topic. Anticipated pathogens and corresponding antibiotic coverage (dose and duration) are enumerated for common vascular and nonvascular interventions in adults. Note that this document is intended to pro-
-
quality improvement guidelines for preventing wrong site wrong procedure and wrong person errors application of the joint commission universal protocol for preventing wrong site wrong procedure wrong person surgery to the practice of interventional r
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2008Co-Authors: John F Angle, Albert A Nemcek, Alan M Cohen, Donald L Miller, Clement J Grassi, Horacio Dagostino, Arshad Ahmed Khan, Sanjoy Kundu, Robert B Osnis, Dheeraj K RajanAbstract:From the Department of Radiology (J.F.A.), Univ sity of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, V ginia; Department of Radiology (A.A.N.), Nor western Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Illino Department of Vascular and Interventional Radi ogy (A.M.C.), University of Texas–Houston; Depa ment of Interventional Radiology (M.J.W.), The U versity of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Cen Houston, Texas; Department of Radiology (D.L.M Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, Mar land; Department of Radiology (C.J.G.), Bost Healthcare System/Veterans Affairs Medical Ce ter, Boston; Department of Radiology (J.F.C.), B state Health System, Springfield, Massachusetts; D partment of Radiology (H.A.D.), Louisiana Sta University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Lo isiana; Department of Interventional Radiolog (A.A.K.), Washington Hospital, Bethesda, Mar land; Department of Medical Imaging (S.K.), Scarborough General Hospital, Richmond Hill; Division represent a valid broad expert consti ency of the subject matter under cons eration for standards production. Technical documents specifying th exact consensus and literature revie methodologies as well as the insti tional affiliations and professional cr dentials of the authors of this do ment are available upon request fro SIR, 3975 Fair Ridge Dr., Suite 4 Fairfax, VA 22033.
