Skip to main content

Table 3 Summarized responses- comparison between participants working in academic vs. nonacademic hospitals

From: Radiology reporting in oncology—oncologists’ perspective

  Academic hospital
No. of respondents (%)
Non-academic hospital
No. of respondents (%)
How easy do you find tumour measurements in the report?
 Most of the time difficult 6/26 (23%) 4/20 (20%)
 Sometimes easy, but sometimes difficult 8/26 (30%) 8/20 (40%)
 Most of the time easy 12/26 (46%) 2/20 (30%)
How often do you, or your team measure tumours?
 Daily > 3 cases 4/26 (15%) 3/20 (15%)
 Daily 1–3 cases 6/26 (23%) 3/20 (15%)
 Weekly 1–3 cases 9/26 (34%) 9/20 (45%)
Measurement criteria currently used for tumour assessment
 RECIST1.1/iRECIST 23/26 (88%) 13/20 (65%)
Is the text only report with minimal quantification adequate for tumour assessment?
 Sometimes, but not very often 10/26 (38%) 8/20 (40%)
 Most of the times 14/26 (53%) 6/20 (30%)
Saved key images with tumour measurements in PACS, makes finding the measurements easier
 Agree/Strongly agree 22/26 (85%) 14/20 (70%)
A structured report following pre-defined templates has better content and greater clarity than conventional, non-structured report.
 Agree/Strongly agree 23/26 (88%) 16/20 (80%)
A report made by a radiologist subspecialised in oncologis imaging is of greater value as compared to a report made by a general radiologist
 Agree/Strongly agree 21/26 (81%) 16/20 (80%)