RPS 1230 - Shaping the future of radiology education

Author Block: R. Magennis¹, E. K. Roditi²; ¹Manchester/UK, ²Glasgow/UK
Purpose: Errors and discrepancies are an unavoidable part of radiology. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends Radiology Events and Learning Meetings (REALM) as a safe forum for discussing them. Beyond reviewing individual cases, these meetings provide powerful insights into the attitudes and behaviours that help radiologists thrive.
Methods or Background: Drawing on a year of REALM discussions and informal participant feedback, we identified seven principles that consistently supported positive learning and professional growth.

Own the Learning – contribute, seek feedback, and embrace radiology event and learning (REAL) as a tool for growth.

Start with Patient Safety – keep patient outcomes at the centre of reflection.

Collaborate to Elevate – value input from colleagues across the team.

Listen Before You Lead – understand others’ reasoning when offering feedback.

Reflect, Don’t React – approach discrepancies with curiosity rather than defensiveness.

Spot the Good – celebrate strong practice as well as errors.

Keep Refining – translate learning into ongoing personal and departmental improvement.
Results or Findings: By embedding these habits, REALM creates a culture of openness and continuous improvement. This strengthens individual confidence, enhances team collaboration, and, most importantly, improves patient safety.
Conclusion: These 7 simple principles help shift REALM from a retrospective review of errors into a forward-looking, supportive process that normalises error, reduces shame and seeks balance with positive cases, further boosting morale. These encourage radiologists to learn together, improve systems, and recognise good practice as well as pitfalls.
Limitations: There are no limitations
Funding for this study: No funding received
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information:

Author Block: R. Magennis, N. Edi-Osagie, M. M. Kiandee; Manchester/UK
Purpose: Structured learning from diagnostic discrepancies is essential in radiology training, particularly in the high-stakes out-of-hours setting. This project describes the implementation of a resident-led learning meeting, tailored to on-call practice and aligned with the RCR’s Radiology Events and Learning (REAL) framework.
Methods or Background: A traffic-light system was introduced to classify consultant-issued addenda to resident reports:
• Green: Consultant agrees with the provisional report.
• Amber: Minor additional finding, not impacting immediate management.
• Red: Significant change or addition requiring urgent communication with the clinical team.
Trainees' provisional reports may precede consultant review by up to 16 hours. Cases were reviewed from the amber and red categories for educational value, not just in terms of clinical diagnostic decisions but also for decision making and communication lessons or human factor related learning. The dedicated resident REAL meeting provides a safe, peer-led forum to discuss anonymised amber/red cases without the perceived inhibition of senior presence.
Results or Findings: Outcomes have included improved confidence in clinical reasoning, greater insight into diagnostic uncertainty, and a stronger culture of reflection and shared learning. Leadership skills were fostered through rotating facilitators, and participants reported feeling empowered to ask questions and openly analyse their decision-making processes.
Unforeseen benefits included early identification of recurrent error patterns and strengthened links between the trainee group and the wider department via feedback loops into the main REAL meeting.
Conclusion: This pilot demonstrates that a psychologically safe, trainee-led forum focused on local discrepancies enhances learning from error, supports professional growth, and ultimately improves patient care.
Limitations: There were no limitations
Funding for this study: No funding received
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information:

Author Block: N. Ding, X. Gao, H. Sun, L. Song, X. Wang, Y. Chen, D. Zhang, H. Xue, Z. Jin; Beijing/CN
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, reliability, and validity of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in radiology resident training, from the perspectives of both examiners and examinees.
Methods or Background: This retrospective observational study analyzed subjective evaluations and objective examination data collected over 6 years (2018–2021, 2023, and 2024). Subjective evaluations were gathered via questionnaires from 198 examiners and 818 examinees to assess the difficulty and satisfaction with the OSCE. Objective data, including examination scores, difficulty indices, and discrimination indices, for each OSCE station were analyzed using correlation analysis and t-tests.
Results or Findings: The OSCE demonstrated stable performance over 6 years, with consistent difficulty levels and discrimination ability across all stations. The average scores for individual stations varied; however, the overall final scores remained stable. Strong correlations between the station and final scores indicate good discrimination. Examinees rated the overall difficulty higher than examiners, but the objective indices aligned with examiner assessments. Over 6 years (198 examiners, 818 examinees), OSCE scores stabilized (85.48–88.48), with improved consistency (station range narrowed to 85.51–93.9 by 2024). Difficulty (0.12–0.15) and discrimination indices remained stable (most p < 0.05). Examinees rated it harder than examiners (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: The OSCE is a reliable, valid, and effective assessment tool in radiology. Evaluating the OSCE from both subjective and objective perspectives ensured the robustness and validity of the examination.
Limitations: This study had certain limitations. First, the retrospective design inherently limits causal inferences, though our 6-year dataset provides robust observational evidence. Second, while the 3-point Likert scale (difficult/moderate/easy) was chosen to maximize response rates during time-sensitive post-exam evaluations, future studies could adopt a 5-point scale for more nuanced feedback.
Funding for this study: This study was supported by the Peking Union Medical College, Graduate Education and Teaching Reform Project in 2024 (grant number: 2024yjsjg006)
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Yes
Ethics committee - additional information: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the conducting institution (No. S-K2067). All participants provided written informed consent prior to inclusion in the study.

Author Block: J. Huovinen, S. Väänänen, A-P. Ronkainen, J. Hakumäki, O. M. Lahtinen; Kuopio/FI
Purpose: While previous studies have shown that interruptions are common in radiologists' workflow, they rely mostly on qualitative data. Interruptions can originate from consultations from trainees, co-workers and clinicians, IR-procedures and tele-communications. We aim to quantify how interruptions affect active reporting times.
Methods or Background: We analyzed radiological reporting between 2019-2025 at the Kuopio University Hospital, Finland. Our dataset included radiological examination and report metadata, user profiles from the reporting databases, and command-level usage logs from the PACS. Reporting times and interruptions were determined from examination opening and closing events in PACS, supplemented by “report completed” timestamps from the RIS. An interruption was defined as accession of an unrelated examination before completing the original report. We investigated the disruptiveness of interruptions by grouping them into categories (Zero, One, Two, Three-or-more interruptions) and conducted multivariable linear regression analysis.
Results or Findings: The median active reporting times of N=42772 MRI, N=92765 CT and N=241936 X-ray examinations were 13.95±18.95 min, 12.75±15.27 min and 2.13±5.28 min, respectively. The median active reporting times for interrupted cases were 16.04±19.24 min (N=9414) for MRI, 14.87±16.15 min (N=16065) for CT and 2.94±7.61 min (N=36334) for X-ray. The median duration of the interruption was 3.74±53.55 min for MRI, 3.14±47.30 min for CT and 1.38±50.10 min for X-ray. After adjusting the examination type, one interruption was associated with a 26% increase in active reporting time (p<0.00, R2=0.52), two interruptions increased the active reporting time 44% and three or more interruptions increased the active reporting time 51%.
Conclusion: Interruptions have a significant impact on radiologists’ active reporting time.
Limitations: Interruption types, subgroups and their effect on report quality will be analyzed in future studies.
Funding for this study: This study was financially supported (or partly supported) by the State Research Funding for university-level health research, Kuopio University Hospital, Wellbeing Service County of North Savo, Project Number 5063601
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information:

Author Block: F. Wegner¹, H. Heinrichs², K. Stahlmann³, F. Kiessling², T. Bäuerle⁴, P. Bannas³; ¹Lübeck/DE, ²Aachen/DE, ³Hamburg/DE, ⁴Mainz/DE
Purpose: Research activities are very important for the advancement of medical disciplines. In the context of increasing workload and persistent staff shortages, both the time and willingness to engage in research are diminishing. A comprehensive understanding of determinants of scientific success is therefore essential to enable its systematic and targeted promotion. The goal of this study was to explore motivation and identify key success factors for research in radiology.
Methods or Background: A nationwide online survey (54 items, duration: 3.5 months) was conducted in Germany. The questionnaire assessed demographic, intrinsic and extrinsic success characteristics, as well as personal and organizational determinants of success, based on an available career success model. The results were reported descriptively, and associations between success factors and success characteristics were evaluated by using linear, binary-logistic, and multinomial regression models.
Results or Findings: A total of 176 individuals participated (164 with academic activity, 10 without). The majority (80%, 139/174) were employed at university hospitals, and 32% held the academic title of Privatdozent (assistant professor) or professor (56/173). The primary motivation for research was intrinsic scientific interest (55%, 89/163), followed by career advancement opportunities (25%, 41/163). Key predictors of intrinsic success included: a) support from department management (β=0.26, p<0.001), b) good work-life balance (β=0.37, p<0.001), and c) sustained engagement in research beyond career milestones (β=0.16, p=0.016). Extrinsic success was significantly associated with mentoring, protected research time, and active involvement in professional societies.
Conclusion: Radiology researchers in Germany are predominantly driven by intrinsic motivation. Established determinants of both intrinsic and extrinsic scientific success were confirmed in this study. Awareness of these factors enables targeted support strategies, potentially enhancing scientific achievement in radiology.
Limitations: The survey was available only in German.
Funding for this study: Federal Ministry of Education and Research; Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01GP1910A
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information:

Author Block: F. Abubacker Sulaiman; Chennai/IN
Purpose: To evaluate the quality of life, occupational stress, and burnout prevalence among radiologists in India, and to identify key professional and interpersonal factors contributing to stress in contemporary radiology practice.
Methods or Background: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted among 210 practicing radiologists across India between January and June 2025. Data were collected using the WHOQOL-BREF and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) along with structured questions on workload, reporting pressure, interpersonal expectations, and lifestyle habits. Responses were anonymized and analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariate regression to determine predictors of high stress and reduced life quality.
Results or Findings: The mean age of participants was 38.4 ± 8.7 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 1.6:1. The average weekly workload was 58 ± 12 hours, and 68% reported frequent emergency or night duties. Turnaround time (TAT) pressure was identified as a major stressor by 74% of respondents, with additional strain arising from referring clinicians demanding immediate appointments and same-day reports (69%), and patients expecting instant results (63%). Overall, 54% exhibited moderate-to-high stress scores, while 39% met criteria for burnout. Long working hours, administrative load, and unrealistic reporting timelines were significantly associated with stress (p < 0.01). Radiologists engaged in teaching or research reported comparatively better psychological well-being.
Conclusion: Indian radiologists face significant occupational stress driven by high workload, rapid report turnaround expectations, and external pressure from referring doctors and patients. Institutional measures promoting realistic scheduling, adequate staffing, and wellness initiatives are essential to preserve mental health and professional satisfaction.
Limitations: Absence of longitudinal follow-up limit generalizability.
Funding for this study: No external funding was received for this study.
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Yes
Ethics committee - additional information: Institutional ethical committee approval was obtained.