DOI:10.2214/AJR.07.6608
AJR 2007; 188:1169
© American Roentgen Ray Society
Comparing Notes, Improving Practice Quality
Robert J. Stanley
Editor in Chief
rstanley{at}uabmc.edu
This year at the annual meeting of the European Congress of
Radiology, in Vienna, Austria, March 9-13, the President of the ECR, Christian
J. Herold, invited the editors of AJR, Radiology, and European
Radiology to participate in a special focus session titled: "Ask
the editors: Discuss your most burning questions and problems with the editors
of the major international radiologic journals." Tony Proto and I
represented the two U.S. journals, while Albert Baert spoke on behalf of
European Radiology, the journal of the European Society of
Radiology.
Each of the editors briefly described his respective journal. European
Radiology is a relatively new journal, while the AJR is the
granddaddy. I was able to show a photograph of our first issue from 1906, when
the AJR was quarterly and then, subsequently, the cover of a 1913
issue when the journal became monthly. Radiology got its start in the
1920s. I personally enjoyed reviewing the history of the AJR in
preparation for this meeting. In the 100 years that it has existed, it has had
11 editors, with Lawrence Reynolds holding the record for most years served,
namely 29.
Following the three introductory statements, the moderators, Geoffrey D.
Rubin from Stanford University and Majda M. Thurnher of the University
Hospital Vienna, opened the floor to questions. Many of the questions related
to the manuscript peer review process, and whether various forms of bias enter
into the decision-making process. Other attendees were curious to know if an
appeals process existed. While there were some small differences in the
editorial policies of the three journals, it was encouraging to see how
similar our views were with regard to the review process and the strong effort
made to remove bias. All three journals did have an appeals process for
reconsidering rejected manuscripts, differing only in procedural areas. We
also discovered that our three journals adhere to the guidelines of the
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
(http://www.icmje.org)
regarding authorship, duplicate publication, plagiarism, and issues of
scientific misconduct. All in all, it was a distinct pleasure to participate
in the Special Focus Sessions portion of the ECR program with my fellow
editors-in-chief.
This month's issue of AJR includes an article titled "The
American Board of Radiology Perspective on Maintenance and Certification: Part
IV—Practice Quality Improvement Diagnostic Radiology"
[1]. In response to the
public's demand for improving the quality and safety of the practice of
medicine in the United States, the American Board of Radiology has developed
and launched their Maintenance of Certification program, of which this is one
specific component. A major goal of the AJR is to promote patient
safety measures, reflected in the recent publication of MRI safety guidelines
[2], as well as multiple
articles dealing with radiation dose reduction. This perspective on practice
quality improvement falls into the continuum of our educational efforts to
promote high quality, evidence-based practice in our specialty.
Based on numerous special presentations made at this year's ECR meeting, I
am encouraged to see that the drive for quality improvement and quality
assurance is becoming a global issue. Change can be slow and laborious, but
change in the right direction appears inevitable. It is apparent that the
leadership of the European Society of Radiology is strongly motivated to
improve the quality of the practice of radiology throughout Europe and, by
example, throughout the other participating countries and continents. It is
gratifying to see that active cooperation and collaboration is occurring
between the radiology leadership in North America and the rest of the world.
The world of radiology keeps getting flatter.
References
- Strife JL, Kun LE, Becker GJ, Dunnick NR, Bosma J, Hattery RR. The
American Board of Radiology perspective on maintenance of certification: part
IV—practice quality improvement diagnostic radiology.
AJR 2007; 188:1183
-1186[Free Full Text]
- Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C, et al. ACR guidance document for
safe MR practices: 2007. AJR 2007; 188:epub ahead of print;
http://www.ajronline.org/aheadofprint/AJR_06_1616.dtl
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Top
References
