RADPEER.sup.a'cents Scoring White Paper

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2008.06.011 Byline: Valerie P. Jackson (a), Trudie Cushing (b), Hani H. Abujudeh (c), James P. Borgstede (d), Kenneth W. Chin (e), Charles K. Grimes (f), David B. Larson (g), Paul A. Larson (h), Robert S. Pyatt (i), William T. Thorwarth (j) Keywords: Peer review; medical errors; harm score; undercalls; overcalls; misinterpretations; disagreement rates Abstract: The ACR's RADPEER.sup.acents program began in 2002; the electronic version, e-RADPEER.sup.acents, was offered in 2005. To date, more than 10,000 radiologists and more than 800 groups are participating in the program. Since the inception of RADPEER, there have been continuing discussions regarding a number of issues, including the scoring system, the subspecialty-specific subcategorization of data collected for each imaging modality, and the validation of interfacility scoring consistency. This white paper reviews the task force discussions, the literature review, and the new recommended scoring process and lexicon for RADPEER. Author Affiliation: (a) Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana (b) American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia (c) Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (d) University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado (e) San Fernando Valley Interventional Radiology & Imaging Center, Encino, California (f) Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine (g) The Children's Hospital, Aurora, Colorado (h) Radiology Associates of Fox Valley, Neenah, Wisconsin (i) Chambersburg Imaging Associates, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania (j) Catawba Radiological Associates, Hickory, North Carolina