The procrustean bed and the self-anointed raters.
Taking the lead from a published rating of radiology/nuclear medicine journals in which, surprisingly, Radiology ranks number 3, the author critically analyzes the formalized statistics-based assessment of the diagnostic radiologic activities. The specific ranking in question is shown to result from an inconsistent treatment of the primary data. Generalizing the discussion, he argues that the radiodiagnostic process, based on image evaluation, is not a suitable candidate for rigidly codified statistical appraisal. Attempts at obtaining by such methods meaningful and timely information on the respective values of rapidly changing radiodiagnostic techniques are not likely to succeed.
Di Chiro
G
G
Neuroimaging Section, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.
D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D011871:Radiology