From uncertainty to understanding: The focus on follow-up initiative
Access to this document is restricted. Some items have been embargoed at the request of the author, but will be made publicly available after the "No Access Until" date.
During the embargo period, you may request access to the item by clicking the link to the restricted file(s) and completing the request form. If we have contact information for a Cornell author, we will contact the author and request permission to provide access. If we do not have contact information for a Cornell author, or the author denies or does not respond to our inquiry, we will not be able to provide access. For more information, review our policies for restricted content.
PURPOSE: Practice-Based Learning and Improvement (PBLI), an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competency and essential component of lifelong learning, is challenging in radiology because feedback on image interpretation is suboptimal. Traditional feedback mechanisms, including peer review and morbidity and mortality conferences, are retrospective and prone to hindsight bias. We developed and evaluated the Focus on Follow-Up Initiative, a structured, prospective case follow-up program to improve diagnostic calibration, enhance skills, and foster lifelong learning. METHODS: Radiology residents at a single academic center were suggested to prospectively record at least one case/week involving diagnostic uncertainty, documenting specific questions at interpretation and performing follow-up using clinicopathologic outcomes. Residents presented selected cases in three 90-minute peer-learning conferences annually. Feasibility and participation were assessed, and resident perceptions were evaluated using an anonymous survey. FINDINGS: The program was feasible, required minimal resources, and achieved high participation over three years. Educational benefits included refined diagnostic thresholds, improved confidence calibration, recognition of cognitive biases and misdiagnoses, and acquisition of discrete teaching points. Survey responses (23/40 residents, 58%) demonstrated high perceived educational value, with mean Likert scores exceeding 4.0/5 across all domains. Most residents reported routine follow-up, and 83% intended to continue this practice. Peer learning and program culture were highly rated (mean 4.5/5). Case examples illustrated positive impacts on patient care. CONCLUSION: This feasible, low-resource intervention integrates prospective feedback into radiology training. By promoting continuous follow-up, structured reflection, and peer learning, it addresses limitations of traditional feedback mechanisms and demonstrates perceived educational benefits by participants.