Communication of the significant but not urgent finding

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 168, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 329-331

  Berlin, Leonard ^a,b  

^a RUSH NORTH SHORE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b RUSH MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LAW SUIT; MALE; MALPRACTICE; MEDICAL LIABILITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RISK MANAGEMENT; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 0031015428     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.168.2.9016199     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. American College of Radiology. ACR standard for communication: diagnostic radiology. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1995
2. American College of Radiology. ACR standard for communication: diagnostic radiology. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1991
3. Berlin L. Malpractice issues in radiology: communication of the urgent finding. AJR 1996; 166:513-515
4. Levinson W. Physician-patient communication: a key to malpractice prevention. JAMA 1994; 272:1619-1620
5. Beckman HB, Markakis KM, Suchman AL, Frankel RM. The doctor-patient relationship and malpractice: lessons from plaintiff depositions. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:1365-1370
6. Jenoff v Gleason, 521 A2d 1323 (NJ Super Ct App Div 1987)
7. Keene v Methodist Hospital, 324 F Supp 233 (Ind 1971)
8. Townsend v Turk, 218 Calif App 3d 278 (Calif 1990)
9. Daly v United States of America, 946 F2d 1467 (9th Cir 1991)
10. Kline TJ, Kline TS. Radiologists, communication, and Resolution 5: a medicolegal issue. Radiology 1992;184:131-134
11. Berlin L. To telephone or not to telephone: how high is the standard? AJR 1992;159:1335-1339
12. American College of Radiology. ACR standard for performance of screening mammography. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1995