Cargando…
American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members
OBJECTIVE: To assess the features of panel members involved in the writing of the ACR-AC and identify alignment with research output and topic-specific research publications. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed on the research output of panel members of 34 ACR-AC documents published in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Vienna
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10317907/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37395838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01456-z |
_version_ | 1785067924899233792 |
---|---|
author | Malhotra, Ajay Bajaj, Suryansh Garg, Tushar Khunte, Mihir Pahwa, Bhavya Wu, Xiao Payabvash, Seyedmehdi Mukherjee, Suresh Gandhi, Dheeraj Forman, Howard P. |
author_facet | Malhotra, Ajay Bajaj, Suryansh Garg, Tushar Khunte, Mihir Pahwa, Bhavya Wu, Xiao Payabvash, Seyedmehdi Mukherjee, Suresh Gandhi, Dheeraj Forman, Howard P. |
author_sort | Malhotra, Ajay |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To assess the features of panel members involved in the writing of the ACR-AC and identify alignment with research output and topic-specific research publications. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed on the research output of panel members of 34 ACR-AC documents published in 2021. For each author, we searched Medline to record total number of papers (P), total number of ACR-AC papers (C) and total number of previously published papers that are relevant to the ACR-AC topic (R). RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-three different panel members constituted 602 panel positions for creating 34 ACR-AC in 2021 with a median panel size of 17 members. Sixty-eight (17.5%) of experts had been part of ≥10 previously published ACR-AC papers and 154 (40%) were members in ≥ 5 published ACR-AC papers. The median number of previously published papers relevant to the ACR-AC topic was 1 (IQR: 0–5). 44% of the panel members had no previously published paper relevant to the ACR-AC topic. The proportion of ACR-AC papers (C/P) was higher for authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.21) than authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.11, p < 0.0001); however, proportion of relevant papers per topic (R/P) was higher for authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.10) than authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.07). CONCLUSION: The composition of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria panels reflects many members with little or no previously published literature on the topic of consideration. Similar pool of experts exists on multiple expert panels formulating imaging appropriateness guidelines. KEY POINTS: There were 68 (17.5%) panel experts on ≥ 10 ACR-AC panels. Nearly 45% of the panel experts had zero median number of relevant papers. Fifteen panels (44%) had > 50% of members having zero relevant papers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10317907 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Vienna |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103179072023-07-05 American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members Malhotra, Ajay Bajaj, Suryansh Garg, Tushar Khunte, Mihir Pahwa, Bhavya Wu, Xiao Payabvash, Seyedmehdi Mukherjee, Suresh Gandhi, Dheeraj Forman, Howard P. Insights Imaging Original Article OBJECTIVE: To assess the features of panel members involved in the writing of the ACR-AC and identify alignment with research output and topic-specific research publications. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed on the research output of panel members of 34 ACR-AC documents published in 2021. For each author, we searched Medline to record total number of papers (P), total number of ACR-AC papers (C) and total number of previously published papers that are relevant to the ACR-AC topic (R). RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-three different panel members constituted 602 panel positions for creating 34 ACR-AC in 2021 with a median panel size of 17 members. Sixty-eight (17.5%) of experts had been part of ≥10 previously published ACR-AC papers and 154 (40%) were members in ≥ 5 published ACR-AC papers. The median number of previously published papers relevant to the ACR-AC topic was 1 (IQR: 0–5). 44% of the panel members had no previously published paper relevant to the ACR-AC topic. The proportion of ACR-AC papers (C/P) was higher for authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.21) than authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.11, p < 0.0001); however, proportion of relevant papers per topic (R/P) was higher for authors with < 5 ACR-AC papers (0.10) than authors with ≥ 5 ACR-AC papers (0.07). CONCLUSION: The composition of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria panels reflects many members with little or no previously published literature on the topic of consideration. Similar pool of experts exists on multiple expert panels formulating imaging appropriateness guidelines. KEY POINTS: There were 68 (17.5%) panel experts on ≥ 10 ACR-AC panels. Nearly 45% of the panel experts had zero median number of relevant papers. Fifteen panels (44%) had > 50% of members having zero relevant papers. Springer Vienna 2023-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10317907/ /pubmed/37395838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01456-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Malhotra, Ajay Bajaj, Suryansh Garg, Tushar Khunte, Mihir Pahwa, Bhavya Wu, Xiao Payabvash, Seyedmehdi Mukherjee, Suresh Gandhi, Dheeraj Forman, Howard P. American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title | American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title_full | American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title_fullStr | American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title_full_unstemmed | American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title_short | American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
title_sort | american college of radiology appropriateness criteria®: a bibliometric analysis of panel members |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10317907/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37395838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01456-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT malhotraajay americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT bajajsuryansh americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT gargtushar americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT khuntemihir americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT pahwabhavya americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT wuxiao americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT payabvashseyedmehdi americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT mukherjeesuresh americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT gandhidheeraj americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers AT formanhowardp americancollegeofradiologyappropriatenesscriteriaabibliometricanalysisofpanelmembers |