Effect of an Electronic Health Record-Integrated Clinical Dashboard for Radiologists on STAT Priority Chest Radiograph Reporting and Downstream Care: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial
Balkman, J. D.; Chimmula, S. R.; Lam, A. M.; Nugent, J. R.; Gadgil, T.; Avins, A. L.; Sax, D. R.; Arasu, V. A.
Show abstract
Background. Chest radiographs (CXRs) are the most common imaging exam performed, but CXR reports can be nonspecific due to incomplete history, relying on vague terms like opacities to convey diagnostic uncertainty. We prospectively evaluated whether introducing a clinical dashboard with relevant patient information affects CXR report specificity and efficiency, report concordance with discharge diagnoses, and follow-up chest CT utilization. Methods. In this stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial (NCT06785246), a clinical dashboard for radiologists was rolled out with user education sessions across 15 service areas of an integrated health system from June 2024 to June 2025. Emergency department (ED) and inpatient CXRs were included. A large language model (GPT-4o) was validated using a Delphi panel of three experts to classify report specificity and CXR report diagnosis. A subsequent model release (GPT-5.4) graded each CXR report impression as negative, specific abnormal, or nonspecific abnormal. It also judged whether an abnormal impression matched an ED discharge diagnosis. The primary outcome was the proportion of specific reports (negative or specific abnormal). Secondary outcomes were report-discharge diagnosis concordance, follow-up chest CT, antibiotic and diuretic orders, and CXR reporting time. Mixed-effects models adjusted for time, patient age, and radiograph view, with random effects for radiologists, facilities, and service area. Results. The trial included 404,860 ED and inpatient encounter STAT priority CXRs read by 387 radiologists (256,303 control; 148,557 intervention). The adjusted proportion of specific reports was 82.2% in control periods and 82.1% in intervention periods (difference, -0.10 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.53 to 0.34; P=.66). Among abnormal reports, concordance with a discharge diagnosis rose from 40.9% to 42.2% (difference, 1.24 points; 95% CI, 0.20 to 2.28; P=.02). Follow-up chest CT fell from 11.4% to 10.9% (difference, -0.55 points; 95% CI, -0.92 to -0.17; P=.004). Antibiotic orders (24.0% vs 23.9%) and diuretic orders (14.7% vs 14.8%) within 7 days did not change, nor did reporting time (difference, -0.8 seconds; 95% CI, -2.7 to 1.0). Conclusions. Giving radiologists EHR context through a dashboard did not change the specificity of STAT priority CXR reports or prescribing patterns. It was associated with small improvements in diagnostic concordance and follow-up CT use, without slowing reporting. Validated large language models make it feasible to measure report quality across a health system.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Validation of a Derived International Patient Severity Algorithm to Support COVID-19 Analytics from Electronic Health Record Data 92%
- Measure what matters: counts of hospitalized patients are a better metric for health system capacity planning for a reopening 92%
- Use of unstructured text in prognostic clinical prediction models: a systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A typology of physician input approaches to using AI chatbots for clinical decision-making: a mixed methods study 92%
- Ambient scribe in general practice: a multi-perspective before-after longitudinal mixed-methods study 92%
- International Electronic Health Record-Derived COVID-19 Clinical Course Profiles: The 4CE Consortium 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development of the Tool for Advancing Practice Performance, a practice-level survey to assess primary care structures and processes 92%
- Chest Drain REgular FLushing in ComplIcated Parapneumonic EFfusions and Empyemas: study protocol for the RELIEF randomized controlled trial 92%
- Clinical academic research in the time of Corona: a simulation study in England and a call for action 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated and partially-automated contact tracing: a rapid systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19 92%
- Remote Covid Assessment in Primary Care (RECAP) risk prediction tool: derivation and real-world validation studies 91%
- Automated and semi-automated contact tracing: Protocol for a rapid review of available evidence and current challenges to inform the control of COVID-19 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Low adherence to existing model reporting guidelines by commonly used clinical prediction models 93%
- COVID-19 outcomes, risk factors and associations by race: a comprehensive analysis using electronic health records data in Michigan Medicine 91%
- Crowdfunding Medical Care: A Comparison of Online Medical Fundraising in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.