Search

Inclusive leadership styles value team members, invite diverse perspectives, and recognize and support the contributions of employees. The authors provide guidance to radiology leaders interested in developing inclusive leadership skills and competencies to improve workforce recruitment and retention and unlock the potential of a rapidly diversifying health care workforce. As health care organizations look to attract the best and brightest talent, they will be increasingly recruiting millennial and Generation Z employees, who belong to the most diverse generations in American history. Additionally, radiology departments currently face critical workforce shortages in radiologists, radiology technicians, staff, and advanced practice providers. In the context of these shortages, the costs of employee turnover have emphasized the need for radiology leaders to develop leadership behaviors that promote recruitment and retention. Radiology department leaders who perceive and treat valued employees as replaceable commodities will be forced to deal with the extremely high costs associated with recruitment and training, decreased morale, and increased burnout. The authors review inclusive versus exclusive leadership styles, describe key attributes and skills of inclusive leaders, provide radiology leaders with concrete methods to make their organizations more inclusive, and outline key steps in change management. By adopting and implementing inclusive leadership strategies, radiology groups can position themselves to succeed in rapidly diversifying health care environments. © RSNA, 2024 See the invited commentary by Siewert in this issue.

Online supplemental material is available for this article.

The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis continues to grow and has resulted in marked changes to clinical operations. In parallel with clinical preparedness, universities have shut down most scientific research activities. Radiology researchers are currently grappling with these challenges that will continue to affect current and future imaging research. The purpose of this article is to describe the collective experiences of a diverse international group of academic radiology research programs in managing their response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The acute response at six distinct institutions will be described first, exploring common themes, challenges, priorities, and practices. This will be followed by reflections about the future of radiology research in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic., (© RSNA, 2020.)

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic will have a profound impact on radiology practices across the country. Policy measures adopted to slow the transmission of disease are decreasing the demand for imaging independent of COVID-19. Hospital preparations to expand crisis capacity are further diminishing the amount of appropriate medical imaging that can be safely performed. Although economic recessions generally tend to result in decreased health care expenditures, radiology groups have never experienced an economic shock that is simultaneously exacerbated by the need to restrict the availability of imaging. Outpatient-heavy practices will feel the biggest impact of these changes, but all imaging volumes will decrease. Anecdotal experience suggests that radiology practices should anticipate 50%-70% decreases in imaging volume that will last a minimum of 3-4 months, depending on the location of practice and the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES, Act provides multiple means of direct and indirect aid to health care providers and small businesses. The final allocation of this funding is not yet clear, and it is likely that additional congressional action will be necessary to stabilize health care markets. Administrators and practice leaders must be proactive with practice modifications and financial maneuvers that can position them to emerge from this pandemic in the most viable economic position. It is possible that this crisis will have lasting effects on the structure of the radiology field., (© RSNA, 2020.)

Intravenous iodinated contrast media are commonly used with CT to evaluate disease and to determine treatment response. The risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) developing in patients with reduced kidney function following exposure to intravenous iodinated contrast media has been overstated. This is due primarily to historic lack of control groups sufficient to separate contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI; ie, AKI caused by contrast media administration) from contrast-associated AKI (CA-AKI; ie, AKI coincident to contrast media administration). Although the true risk of CI-AKI remains uncertain for patients with severe kidney disease, prophylaxis with intravenous normal saline is indicated for patients who have AKI or an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 who are not undergoing maintenance dialysis. In individual high-risk circumstances, prophylaxis may be considered in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30-44 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at the discretion of the ordering clinician. This article is a simultaneous joint publication in Radiology and Kidney Medicine . The articles are identical except for stylistic changes in keeping with each journal's style. Either version may be used in citing this article., (© 2020 RSNA and the National Kidney Foundation published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY NC-ND license.)

Purpose To explore subspecialty workforce considerations surrounding invasive procedures performed by radiologists. Materials and Methods The 2015 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File was used to identify all invasive procedures (Current Procedural Terminology code range, 10000-69999) billed by radiologists for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Radiologists were categorized by subspecialty according to the majority of their billable work-relative value units (wRVUs). Those without a single subspecialty majority work effort were deemed generalists. Procedures were categorized into three tiers of complexity (high, ≥4.0 wRVUs; mid, 1.6-3.9 wRVUs; low, ≤1.5 wRVUs). Total and tiered generalist versus subspecialist workforce composition was assessed. Results Just 25 unique services comprised more than 75% of invasive procedures performed by radiologists. Of radiologists who performed procedures, 57.5% were generalists, 15.8% were interventionalists, and 26.8% were other subspecialists. Of the radiologists who performed low-, mid-, and high-complexity procedures, generalists accounted for 46.3%, 30.9%, and 23.1%, respectively; interventionalists accounted for 35.4%, 30.9%, and 75.2%, respectively; and other subspecialists accounted for 18.3%, 14.6%, and 1.7%, respectively. Generalists were the dominant providers of six of the top 10 low-complexity and seven of the top 10 midcomplexity procedures. Interventionalists were the dominant providers of all top 10 high-complexity procedures. Nationally, over twice as many U.S. counties had local access to generalists (869 counties) for invasive procedures versus interventionalists (347 counties) or other subspecialists (380 counties). Conclusion Among radiologists, generalists perform far more procedures in more geographic locations and are more likely to serve patients with less complex service needs than are interventionalists or other subspecialists. Practices and professional societies must remain vigilant to ensure that the subspecialty evolution in radiology does not exacerbate patient access disparities. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

While the looming threat of large-scale disruptive innovation consumes disproportionate attention, incremental innovation remains an important tool for preserving and growing radiology practices within a dynamic marketplace. Incremental innovation, defined as the process of making improvements or additions to an organization while maintaining the organization's core product or service model, is accessible to practices of all sizes and must not be overlooked if practices are to maintain their competitive advantage. This article explores cultural, structural, and process enablers for incremental innovation. Successful innovation cultures foster the ability to import and exploit external knowledge (adaptive capacity), encourage creative thought from all levels of the organization, display sensitivity toward the competency-destroying potential of certain changes, cultivate a positive perceptual bias toward organizational threats, and build tolerance for risk and uncertainty when prototyping new ideas. Structural elements promoting incremental innovation include dedicated resources for innovation planning, flexible and organic team structures, strong centralized governance models, robust communication systems, and organizational incentives encouraging exploration of new concepts. Processes important to innovation include periodic environmental scanning, strategic and scenario planning, use of an objectively gated system for testing and filtering new ideas, and use of an approach to implementation that emphasizes empowerment of project managers, removal of barriers, and proactive communication around change., (© RSNA, 2018.)

The migration of imaging reports to electronic medical record systems holds great potential in terms of advancing radiology research and practice by leveraging the large volume of data continuously being updated, integrated, and shared. However, there are significant challenges as well, largely due to the heterogeneity of how these data are formatted. Indeed, although there is movement toward structured reporting in radiology (ie, hierarchically itemized reporting with use of standardized terminology), the majority of radiology reports remain unstructured and use free-form language. To effectively "mine" these large datasets for hypothesis testing, a robust strategy for extracting the necessary information is needed. Manual extraction of information is a time-consuming and often unmanageable task. "Intelligent" search engines that instead rely on natural language processing (NLP), a computer-based approach to analyzing free-form text or speech, can be used to automate this data mining task. The overall goal of NLP is to translate natural human language into a structured format (ie, a fixed collection of elements), each with a standardized set of choices for its value, that is easily manipulated by computer programs to (among other things) order into subcategories or query for the presence or absence of a finding. The authors review the fundamentals of NLP and describe various techniques that constitute NLP in radiology, along with some key applications., (©RSNA, 2016.)

On the basis of the National Lung Screening Trial data released in 2011, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force made lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (CT) a public health recommendation in 2013. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) currently reimburse LCS for asymptomatic individuals aged 55-77 years who have a tobacco smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and who are either currently smoking or had quit less than 15 years earlier. Commercial insurers reimburse the cost of LCS for individuals aged 55-80 years with the same smoking history. Effective care for the millions of Americans who qualify for LCS requires an organized step-wise approach. The 10-pillar model reflects the elements required to support a successful LCS program: eligibility, education, examination ordering, image acquisition, image review, communication, referral network, quality improvement, reimbursement, and research frontiers. Examination ordering can be coupled with decision support to ensure that only eligible individuals undergo LCS. Communication of results revolves around the Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) from the American College of Radiology. Lung-RADS is a structured decision-oriented reporting system designed to minimize the rate of false-positive screening examination results. With nodule size and morphology as discriminators, Lung-RADS links nodule management pathways to the variety of nodules present on LCS CT studies. Tracking of patient outcomes is facilitated by a CMS-approved national registry maintained by the American College of Radiology. Online supplemental material is available for this article., ((©)RSNA, 2015.)

Patient-centered care (ie, care organized around the patient) is a model in which health care providers partner with patients and families to identify and satisfy patients' needs and preferences. In this model, providers respect patients' values and preferences, address their emotional and social needs, and involve them and their families in decision making. Radiologists have traditionally been characterized as "doctor-to-doctor" consultants who are distanced from patients and work within a culture that does not value patient centeredness. As medicine becomes more patient driven and the trajectory of health care is toward increasing patient self-reliance, radiologists must change the perception that they are merely consultants and become more active participants in patient care by embracing greater patient interaction. The traditional business model for radiology practices, which devalues interaction between patients and radiologists, must be transformed into a patient-centered model in which radiologists are reintegrated into direct patient care and imaging processes are reorganized around patients' needs and preferences. Expanding radiology's core assets to include direct patient care may be the most effective deterrent to the threat of commoditization. As the assault on the growth of Medicare spending continues, with medical imaging as a highly visible target, radiologists must adapt to the changing landscape by focusing on their most important consumer: the patient. This may yield substantial benefits in the form of improved quality and patient safety, reduced costs, higher-value care, improved patient outcomes, and greater patient and provider satisfaction., (© RSNA, 2015.)

Arriving at a medical diagnosis is a highly complex process that is extremely error prone. Missed or delayed diagnoses often lead to patient harm and missed opportunities for treatment. Since medical imaging is a major contributor to the overall diagnostic process, it is also a major potential source of diagnostic error. Although some diagnoses may be missed because of the technical or physical limitations of the imaging modality, including image resolution, intrinsic or extrinsic contrast, and signal-to-noise ratio, most missed radiologic diagnoses are attributable to image interpretation errors by radiologists. Radiologic interpretation cannot be mechanized or automated; it is a human enterprise based on complex psychophysiologic and cognitive processes and is itself subject to a wide variety of error types, including perceptual errors (those in which an important abnormality is simply not seen on the images) and cognitive errors (those in which the abnormality is visually detected but the meaning or importance of the finding is not correctly understood or appreciated). The overall prevalence of radiologists' errors in practice does not appear to have changed since it was first estimated in the 1960s. The authors review the epidemiology of errors in diagnostic radiology, including a recently proposed taxonomy of radiologists' errors, as well as research findings, in an attempt to elucidate possible underlying causes of these errors. The authors also propose strategies for error reduction in radiology. On the basis of current understanding, specific suggestions are offered as to how radiologists can improve their performance in practice., (© RSNA, 2015.)

Harm from medical error is a difficult challenge in health care, including radiology. Modern approaches to patient safety have shifted from a focus on individual performance and reaction to errors to development of robust systems and processes that create safety in organizations. Organizations that operate safely in high-risk environments have been termed high-reliability organizations. Such organizations tend to see themselves as being constantly bombarded by errors. Thus, the goal is not to eliminate human error but to develop strategies to prevent, identify, and mitigate errors and their effects before they result in harm. High-level reliability strategies focus on systems and organizational culture; intermediate-level reliability strategies focus on establishment of effective processes; low-level reliability strategies focus on individual performance. Although several classification schemes for human error exist, modern safety researchers caution against overreliance on error investigations to improve safety. Blaming individuals involved in adverse events when they had no intent to cause harm has been shown to undermine organizational safety. Safety researchers have coined the term just culture for the successful balance of individual accountability with accommodation for human fallibility and system deficiencies. Safety is inextricably intertwined with an organization's quality efforts. A quality management system that focuses on standardization, making errors visible, building in quality, and constantly stopping to fix problems results in a safer environment and engages personnel in a way that contributes to a culture of safety., (© RSNA, 2015.)

Human factors engineering (HFE) focuses on the design and analysis of interactive systems that involve people, technical equipment, and work environment. HFE is informed by knowledge of human characteristics. It complements existing patient safety efforts by specifically taking into consideration that, as humans, frontline staff will inevitably make mistakes. Therefore, the systems with which they interact should be designed for the anticipation and mitigation of human errors. The goal of HFE is to optimize the interaction of humans with their work environment and technical equipment to maximize safety and efficiency. Special safeguards include usability testing, standardization of processes, and use of checklists and forcing functions. However, the effectiveness of the safety program and resiliency of the organization depend on timely reporting of all safety events independent of patient harm, including perceived potential risks, bad outcomes that occur even when proper protocols have been followed, and episodes of "improvisation" when formal guidelines are found not to exist. Therefore, an institution must adopt a robust culture of safety, where the focus is shifted from blaming individuals for errors to preventing future errors, and where barriers to speaking up-including barriers introduced by steep authority gradients-are minimized. This requires creation of formal guidelines to address safety concerns, establishment of unified teams with open communication and shared responsibility for patient safety, and education of managers and senior physicians to perceive the reporting of safety concerns as a benefit rather than a threat., (© RSNA, 2015.)

Serious adverse events continue to occur in clinical practice, despite our best preventive efforts. It is essential that radiologists, both as individuals and as a part of organizations, learn from such events and make appropriate changes to decrease the likelihood that such events will recur. Root cause analysis (RCA) is a process to (a) identify factors that underlie variation in performance or that predispose an event toward undesired outcomes and (b) allow for development of effective strategies to decrease the likelihood of similar adverse events occurring in the future. An RCA process should be performed within the environment of a culture of safety, focusing on underlying system contributors and, in a confidential manner, taking into account the emotional effects on the staff involved. The Joint Commission now requires that a credible RCA be performed within 45 days for all sentinel or major adverse events, emphasizing the need for all radiologists to understand the processes with which an effective RCA can be performed. Several RCA-related tools that have been found to be useful in the radiology setting include the "five whys" approach to determine causation; cause-and-effect, or Ishikawa, diagrams; causal tree mapping; affinity diagrams; and Pareto charts., (© RSNA, 2015.)

The implementation of standardized infection control and prevention practices is increasingly relevant as modern radiology practice evolves into its more clinical role. Current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, and World Health Organization guidelines for the proper use of personal protective equipment, decontamination of reusable medical equipment, and appropriate management of bloodborne pathogen exposures will be reviewed. Standard precautions apply to all patients at all times and are the mainstay of infection control. Proper hand hygiene includes washing hands with soap and water when exposed to certain infectious particles, such as Clostridium difficile spores, which are not inactivated by alcohol-based hand rubs. The appropriate use of personal protective equipment in accordance with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention includes wearing a surgical mask during lumbar puncture. Because radiologists may perform lumbar punctures for patients with prion disease, it is important to appreciate that incineration is the most effective method of inactivating prion proteins. However, there is currently no consensus recommendation on the decontamination of prion-contaminated reusable items associated with lumbar puncture, and institutional policies should be consulted for directed management. In the event of a needlestick injury, radiology staff must be able to quickly provide appropriate initial management and seek medical attention, including laboratory testing for bloodborne pathogens., (©RSNA, 2015.)

Current comprehensive health care reform in the United States demands that policy makers, insurers, providers, and patients work in reshaping the health care system to deliver care that is both more affordable and of higher quality. A tectonic shift is under way that runs contrary to the traditional goal of radiology groups to perform and interpret large numbers of imaging examinations. In fact, radiology service requisitions now must be evaluated for their appropriateness, possibly resulting in a reduction in the number of imaging studies performed. To be successful, radiology groups will have to restructure their business practices and strategies to align with the emerging health care paradigm. This article outlines a four-stage strategic framework that has aided corporations in achieving their goals and that can be readily adapted and applied by radiologists. The four stages are (a) definition and articulation of a purpose, (b) clear definition of strategic goals, (c) prioritization of specific strategic enablers, and (d) implementation of processes for tracking progress and enabling continuous adaptation. The authors provide practical guidance for applying specific tools such as analyses of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (so-called SWOT analyses), prioritization matrices, and balanced scorecards to accomplish each stage. By adopting and applying these tools within the strategic framework outlined, radiology groups can position themselves to succeed in the evolving health care environment., (RSNA, 2015)

The Semantic Web is an effort to add semantics, or "meaning," to empower automated searching and processing of Web-based information. The overarching goal of the Semantic Web is to enable users to more easily find, share, and combine information. Critical to this vision are knowledge models called ontologies, which define a set of concepts and formalize the relations between them. Ontologies have been developed to manage and exploit the large and rapidly growing volume of information in biomedical domains. In diagnostic radiology, lists of differential diagnoses of imaging observations, called gamuts, provide an important source of knowledge. The Radiology Gamuts Ontology (RGO) is a formal knowledge model of differential diagnoses in radiology that includes 1674 differential diagnoses, 19,017 terms, and 52,976 links between terms. Its knowledge is used to provide an interactive, freely available online reference of radiology gamuts ( www.gamuts.net ). A Web service allows its content to be discovered and consumed by other information systems. The RGO integrates radiologic knowledge with other biomedical ontologies as part of the Semantic Web., (© RSNA, 2014.)

Quantitative assessments on images are crucial to clinical decision making, especially in cancer patients, in whom measurements of lesions are tracked over time. However, the potential value of quantitative approaches to imaging is impeded by the difficulty and time-intensive nature of compiling this information from prior studies and reporting corresponding information on current studies. The authors believe that the quantitative imaging work flow can be automated by making temporal data computationally accessible. In this article, they demonstrate the utility of the Annotation and Image Markup standard in a World Wide Web-based application that was developed to automatically summarize prior and current quantitative imaging measurements. The system calculates the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors metric, along with several alternative indicators of cancer treatment response, by using the data stored in the annotation files. The application also allows the user to overlay the recorded metrics on the original images for visual inspection. Clinical evaluation of the system demonstrates its potential utility in accelerating the standard radiology work flow and in providing a means to evaluate alternative response metrics that are difficult to compute by hand. The system, which illustrates the utility of capturing quantitative information in a standard format and linking it to the image from which it was derived, could enhance quantitative imaging in clinical practice without adversely affecting the current work flow.

In the coming decades, those who provide radiologic imaging services will be increasingly challenged by the economic, demographic, and political forces affecting healthcare to improve their efficiency, enhance the value of their services, and achieve greater customer satisfaction. It is essential that radiologists master and consistently apply basic process improvement skills that have allowed professionals in many other fields to thrive in a competitive environment. The authors provide a step-by-step overview of process improvement from the perspective of a radiologic imaging practice by describing their experience in conducting a process improvement project: to increase the daily volume of body magnetic resonance imaging examinations performed at their institution. The first step in any process improvement project is to identify and prioritize opportunities for improvement in the work process. Next, an effective project team must be formed that includes representatives of all participants in the process. An achievable aim must be formulated, appropriate measures selected, and baseline data collected to determine the effects of subsequent efforts to achieve the aim. Each aspect of the process in question is then analyzed by using appropriate tools (eg, flowcharts, fishbone diagrams, Pareto diagrams) to identify opportunities for beneficial change. Plans for change are then established and implemented with regular measurements and review followed by necessary adjustments in course. These so-called PDSA (planning, doing, studying, and acting) cycles are repeated until the aim is achieved or modified and the project closed.

Radiology departments today are faced with many challenges to improve operational efficiency, performance, and quality. Many organizations rely on antiquated, paper-based methods to review their historical performance and understand their operations. With increased workloads, geographically dispersed image acquisition and reading sites, and rapidly changing technologies, this approach is increasingly untenable. A Web-based dashboard was constructed to automate the extraction, processing, and display of indicators and thereby provide useful and current data for twice-monthly departmental operational meetings. The feasibility of extracting specific metrics from clinical information systems was evaluated as part of a longer-term effort to build a radiology business intelligence architecture. Operational data were extracted from clinical information systems and stored in a centralized data warehouse. Higher-level analytics were performed on the centralized data, a process that generated indicators in a dynamic Web-based graphical environment that proved valuable in discussion and root cause analysis. Results aggregated over a 24-month period since implementation suggest that this operational business intelligence reporting system has provided significant data for driving more effective management decisions to improve productivity, performance, and quality of service in the department.

Four main areas of quality need to be addressed for a complete quality and safety program in radiology: safety, process improvement, professional outcome assessment, and satisfaction. These areas need to be coordinated by individuals who belong to a quality oversight committee. Management of the data can be facilitated by using a quality scorecard that posts relevant data for each operational group within a department. The ultimate goal is a cultural shift in which all departmental workers assume responsibility for quality and safety improvements and behave consistently with the core values of the organization. A road map for thinking about quality and safety issues in radiology allows all of these areas to be tied together. Four main areas of development are required, each demanding a different skill set and approach., (Copyright RSNA, 2009)

To improve the safety and quality of the care that radiologists provide, and to allow radiologists and radiology personnel to remain competitive in an increasingly complex environment, it is essential that all imaging departments establish and maintain managed, comprehensive, and effective performance improvement programs. Although the structure and focus of these programs can vary, a number of common components exist, many of which are now widely mandated by organizations that regulate the field of radiology. Basic components include patient safety, process improvement, customer service, professional staff assessment, and education, each of which requires strategies for implementing continuous programs to monitor performance, analyzing and depicting data, implementing change, and meeting regulatory requirements. All of these components are part of a comprehensive quality management system in a large academic radiology department. For smaller departments or practices, the gradual introduction of one or more of these components is useful in ensuring the safety and quality of their services., ((c) RSNA, 2009.)

The sharing of radiologic images has become a fundamental part of radiology services and is essential for delivering high-quality care. Film is quickly becoming obsolete as a means of transporting and sharing large volumes of imaging data. Image sharing has evolved from film to transportable media (eg, compact disks) to direct electronic exchange over the Internet. The latter two means of image sharing have associated work flow-related and technical challenges for which solutions are being developed. Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) provides a standards-based approach to the development of robust, universally accepted solutions. Several IHE profiles have been developed to provide a framework for current image sharing efforts. The Philadelphia and New Jersey Health Information Exchanges and the Canada Health Infoway represent efforts to apply IHE technical profiles to facilitate the secure and confidential exchange of electronic images over the Internet. The research community is concomitantly developing solutions that solve image exchange issues that are specific to research (eg, the sharing of deidentified data) but that might also be encountered in the general population. The personal health record is a more recent development that may provide consumers with direct control over the process of sharing images electronically with their healthcare providers.

The digital revolution in radiology introduced the need for electronic export of medical images. However, the current export process is complicated and time consuming. In response to this continued difficulty, the Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) initiative published the Teaching File and Clinical Trial Export (TCE) integration profile. The IHE TCE profile describes a method for using existing standards to simplify the export of key medical images for education, research, and publication. This article reviews the authors' experience in implementing the TCE profile in the following three processes: (a) the retrieval of images for a typical teaching file application within a TCE-compliant picture archiving and communication system (PACS); (b) the export of images, independent of TCE compliance of the PACS, to a typical teaching file application; and (c) the TCE-compliant transfer of images for publication. These examples demonstrate methods with which the TCE profile can be implemented to ease the burden of collecting key medical images from the PACS.

Creation of significant learning experiences follows basic steps of instructional design related to situational factors, goals and objectives, feedback and evaluation methods, teaching and learning activities, alignment of the preceding elements, and course evaluation. Goals should reflect what students will learn at the end of the course and what will still be with them several years later. Objectives should focus on learner performance, not teacher performance, and on behavior, not subject matter; there should be only one learning outcome per objective. Students learn more and retain their knowledge longer if they acquire it in an active rather than a passive manner. The situational factors, goals and objectives, feedback and evaluation, and teaching and learning activities should all reflect and support each other. The act of course evaluation closes the educational loop of design, implement, evaluate, and modify., ((c) RSNA, 2007.)

So far, this series has described and illustrated the first four steps of the five-step evidence-based practice (EBP) process that was originally designed and taught by the medical epidemiologists of McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) and the National Health Service Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (University of Oxford, Oxford, England). This article in the series first briefly considers the fifth step (evaluate). A more detailed consideration of caveats, common questions, and challenges relevant to EBP in radiology then follows. These are issues that merit some thought by those beginning or continuing work in EBP.