Medicolegal Aspects and Informed Consent View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:Chapter     


Chapter Info

DATE

2016-03-29

AUTHORS

Leonard Berlin

ABSTRACT

With the advent of high resolution CT, MRI, and ultrasound scanning, the frequency of radiologists’ serendipitous discovery of incidental findings (colloquially referred to as “incidentalomas”) on radiological examinations is increasing. Incidentalomas account for approximately 20% of all findings, due to two reasons: (a) the number of hi-tech imaging exams (primarily CT) performed today, and (b) the increasing sophistication of the technology. In the early 1980s when CT scanning was in its infancy, 3 to 5 million scans were performed annually in the US. In the past few years, the annual number of CT scans performed in the US has increased exponentially to well over 80 million. In addition, the specificity of the equipment has advanced geometrically such that abnormalities and/or pseudo-abnormalities 1 mm or a fraction of 1 mm in size that were virtually “invisible” before can now be seen quite easily.Statistically only 1% or less of these incidentalomas represent an early malignancy or other severe pathology. Thus, radiologists are faced with a dilemma: if they report every incidentaloma, many patients will be subjected to a cascade of costly testing, sometimes leading to biopsies or other invasive procedures, all of which on occasion may lead to complications and cause harm to the patient who was completely healthy and was never ill to begin with. On the other hand, should the radiologist decide not to report the presence of an incidentaloma, and it is later discovered that it was indeed an early malignancy and thus a fatal delay in diagnosis and treatment ensued, the patient could be permanently harmed or even die, and a medical malpractice lawsuit would almost certainly follow.What, if anything, should the radiologist report to the patient or the referring physician, when faced with an incidentaloma? Should, or must, informed consent be required? This Chapter will focus on both the moral-ethical, and the medico-legal, aspects of the incidentaloma dilemma faced everyday by radiologists as well as treating physicians. More... »

PAGES

25-34

Book

TITLE

Incidental Radiological Findings

ISBN

978-3-319-42579-5
978-3-319-42581-8

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/174_2016_35

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/174_2016_35

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1007248942


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/11", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Medical and Health Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/1103", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Clinical Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.185648.6", 
          "name": [
            "Radiology Department, Skokie Hospital, 9600 Gross Point Road, 60076, Skokie, IL, USA", 
            "Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA", 
            "University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Berlin", 
        "givenName": "Leonard", 
        "id": "sg:person.01146703320.54", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01146703320.54"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "2016-03-29", 
    "datePublishedReg": "2016-03-29", 
    "description": "With the advent of high resolution CT, MRI, and ultrasound scanning, the frequency of radiologists\u2019 serendipitous discovery of incidental findings (colloquially referred to as \u201cincidentalomas\u201d) on radiological examinations is increasing. Incidentalomas account for approximately 20% of all findings, due to two reasons: (a) the number of hi-tech imaging exams (primarily CT) performed today, and (b) the increasing sophistication of the technology. In the early 1980s when CT scanning was in its infancy, 3 to 5 million scans were performed annually in the US. In the past few years, the annual number of CT scans performed in the US has increased exponentially to well over 80 million. In addition, the specificity of the equipment has advanced geometrically such that abnormalities and/or pseudo-abnormalities 1 mm or a fraction of 1 mm in size that were virtually \u201cinvisible\u201d before can now be seen quite easily.Statistically only 1% or less of these incidentalomas represent an early malignancy or other severe pathology. Thus, radiologists are faced with a dilemma: if they report every incidentaloma, many patients will be subjected to a cascade of costly testing, sometimes leading to biopsies or other invasive procedures, all of which on occasion may lead to complications and cause harm to the patient who was completely healthy and was never ill to begin with. On the other hand, should the radiologist decide not to report the presence of an incidentaloma, and it is later discovered that it was indeed an early malignancy and thus a fatal delay in diagnosis and treatment ensued, the patient could be permanently harmed or even die, and a medical malpractice lawsuit would almost certainly follow.What, if anything, should the radiologist report to the patient or the referring physician, when faced with an incidentaloma? Should, or must, informed consent be required? This Chapter will focus on both the moral-ethical, and the medico-legal, aspects of the incidentaloma dilemma faced everyday by radiologists as well as treating physicians.", 
    "editor": [
      {
        "familyName": "Weckbach", 
        "givenName": "Sabine", 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "genre": "chapter", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/174_2016_35", 
    "inLanguage": "en", 
    "isAccessibleForFree": false, 
    "isPartOf": {
      "isbn": [
        "978-3-319-42579-5", 
        "978-3-319-42581-8"
      ], 
      "name": "Incidental Radiological Findings", 
      "type": "Book"
    }, 
    "keywords": [
      "early malignancy", 
      "informed consent", 
      "high-resolution CT", 
      "incidental finding", 
      "radiological examination", 
      "incidentalomas", 
      "CT scan", 
      "invasive procedures", 
      "patients", 
      "imaging exams", 
      "CT scanning", 
      "resolution CT", 
      "radiologist's report", 
      "severe pathology", 
      "fatal delay", 
      "medicolegal aspects", 
      "malignancy", 
      "annual number", 
      "medical malpractice lawsuits", 
      "radiologists", 
      "malpractice lawsuits", 
      "physicians", 
      "scans", 
      "consent", 
      "complications", 
      "biopsy", 
      "findings", 
      "abnormalities", 
      "costly testing", 
      "diagnosis", 
      "pathology", 
      "MRI", 
      "CT", 
      "serendipitous discovery", 
      "treatment", 
      "infancy", 
      "examination", 
      "report", 
      "exam", 
      "scanning", 
      "years", 
      "harm", 
      "specificity", 
      "occasions", 
      "testing", 
      "cascade", 
      "number", 
      "dilemma", 
      "procedure", 
      "presence", 
      "uses", 
      "aspects", 
      "frequency", 
      "early 1980s", 
      "addition", 
      "advent", 
      "reasons", 
      "fraction", 
      "delay", 
      "hand", 
      "discovery", 
      "size", 
      "lawsuits", 
      "chapter", 
      "equipment", 
      "today", 
      "sophistication", 
      "technology"
    ], 
    "name": "Medicolegal Aspects and Informed Consent", 
    "pagination": "25-34", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1007248942"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1007/174_2016_35"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "publisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature", 
      "type": "Organisation"
    }, 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2016_35", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1007248942"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "chapters", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2022-05-10T10:44", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20220509/entities/gbq_results/chapter/chapter_259.jsonl", 
    "type": "Chapter", 
    "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2016_35"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/174_2016_35'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/174_2016_35'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/174_2016_35'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/174_2016_35'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

130 TRIPLES      23 PREDICATES      92 URIs      85 LITERALS      7 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1007/174_2016_35 schema:about anzsrc-for:11
2 anzsrc-for:1103
3 schema:author Nc5f5577f9b30437e86bca3548372e22a
4 schema:datePublished 2016-03-29
5 schema:datePublishedReg 2016-03-29
6 schema:description With the advent of high resolution CT, MRI, and ultrasound scanning, the frequency of radiologists’ serendipitous discovery of incidental findings (colloquially referred to as “incidentalomas”) on radiological examinations is increasing. Incidentalomas account for approximately 20% of all findings, due to two reasons: (a) the number of hi-tech imaging exams (primarily CT) performed today, and (b) the increasing sophistication of the technology. In the early 1980s when CT scanning was in its infancy, 3 to 5 million scans were performed annually in the US. In the past few years, the annual number of CT scans performed in the US has increased exponentially to well over 80 million. In addition, the specificity of the equipment has advanced geometrically such that abnormalities and/or pseudo-abnormalities 1 mm or a fraction of 1 mm in size that were virtually “invisible” before can now be seen quite easily.Statistically only 1% or less of these incidentalomas represent an early malignancy or other severe pathology. Thus, radiologists are faced with a dilemma: if they report every incidentaloma, many patients will be subjected to a cascade of costly testing, sometimes leading to biopsies or other invasive procedures, all of which on occasion may lead to complications and cause harm to the patient who was completely healthy and was never ill to begin with. On the other hand, should the radiologist decide not to report the presence of an incidentaloma, and it is later discovered that it was indeed an early malignancy and thus a fatal delay in diagnosis and treatment ensued, the patient could be permanently harmed or even die, and a medical malpractice lawsuit would almost certainly follow.What, if anything, should the radiologist report to the patient or the referring physician, when faced with an incidentaloma? Should, or must, informed consent be required? This Chapter will focus on both the moral-ethical, and the medico-legal, aspects of the incidentaloma dilemma faced everyday by radiologists as well as treating physicians.
7 schema:editor N19c236181cdd4d1ba867677d2b6ec962
8 schema:genre chapter
9 schema:inLanguage en
10 schema:isAccessibleForFree false
11 schema:isPartOf N25fc630cdd1f4e94b90d7ff8768cc18b
12 schema:keywords CT
13 CT scan
14 CT scanning
15 MRI
16 abnormalities
17 addition
18 advent
19 annual number
20 aspects
21 biopsy
22 cascade
23 chapter
24 complications
25 consent
26 costly testing
27 delay
28 diagnosis
29 dilemma
30 discovery
31 early 1980s
32 early malignancy
33 equipment
34 exam
35 examination
36 fatal delay
37 findings
38 fraction
39 frequency
40 hand
41 harm
42 high-resolution CT
43 imaging exams
44 incidental finding
45 incidentalomas
46 infancy
47 informed consent
48 invasive procedures
49 lawsuits
50 malignancy
51 malpractice lawsuits
52 medical malpractice lawsuits
53 medicolegal aspects
54 number
55 occasions
56 pathology
57 patients
58 physicians
59 presence
60 procedure
61 radiological examination
62 radiologist's report
63 radiologists
64 reasons
65 report
66 resolution CT
67 scanning
68 scans
69 serendipitous discovery
70 severe pathology
71 size
72 sophistication
73 specificity
74 technology
75 testing
76 today
77 treatment
78 uses
79 years
80 schema:name Medicolegal Aspects and Informed Consent
81 schema:pagination 25-34
82 schema:productId Nb6bc8f01b4e64b72b613ea016c997789
83 Nc75186fb5ab84e29a4d2a8250e8a1180
84 schema:publisher N4721b3d3b0b741019bcd8ed30e8b1d5a
85 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1007248942
86 https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2016_35
87 schema:sdDatePublished 2022-05-10T10:44
88 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
89 schema:sdPublisher N613bf42cefaa4aa38d59ee7d18ff0a57
90 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2016_35
91 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
92 sgo:sdDataset chapters
93 rdf:type schema:Chapter
94 N19c236181cdd4d1ba867677d2b6ec962 rdf:first N72e0f0aa3107423ba0364ff3ece0b936
95 rdf:rest rdf:nil
96 N25fc630cdd1f4e94b90d7ff8768cc18b schema:isbn 978-3-319-42579-5
97 978-3-319-42581-8
98 schema:name Incidental Radiological Findings
99 rdf:type schema:Book
100 N4721b3d3b0b741019bcd8ed30e8b1d5a schema:name Springer Nature
101 rdf:type schema:Organisation
102 N613bf42cefaa4aa38d59ee7d18ff0a57 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
103 rdf:type schema:Organization
104 N72e0f0aa3107423ba0364ff3ece0b936 schema:familyName Weckbach
105 schema:givenName Sabine
106 rdf:type schema:Person
107 Nb6bc8f01b4e64b72b613ea016c997789 schema:name dimensions_id
108 schema:value pub.1007248942
109 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
110 Nc5f5577f9b30437e86bca3548372e22a rdf:first sg:person.01146703320.54
111 rdf:rest rdf:nil
112 Nc75186fb5ab84e29a4d2a8250e8a1180 schema:name doi
113 schema:value 10.1007/174_2016_35
114 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
115 anzsrc-for:11 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
116 schema:name Medical and Health Sciences
117 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
118 anzsrc-for:1103 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
119 schema:name Clinical Sciences
120 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
121 sg:person.01146703320.54 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.185648.6
122 schema:familyName Berlin
123 schema:givenName Leonard
124 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01146703320.54
125 rdf:type schema:Person
126 grid-institutes:grid.185648.6 schema:alternateName University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA
127 schema:name Radiology Department, Skokie Hospital, 9600 Gross Point Road, 60076, Skokie, IL, USA
128 Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA
129 University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA
130 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...