title: Portrayal of radiology in a major medical television series: How does it influence the perception of radiology among patients and radiology professionals?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess how the portrayal of Radiology on medical TV shows is perceived by patients and radiology professionals.
  
  
  METHODS
  In this IRB-approved study with patient consent waived, surveys were conducted among adult patients scheduled for radiological examinations and radiology professionals. The questionnaire investigated medical TV watching habits including interest in medical TV shows, appearance of radiological examination/staff, radiology's role in diagnosis-making, and rating of the shows' accuracy in portraying radiology relative to reality.
  
  
  RESULTS
  One hundred and twenty-six patients and 240 professionals (133 technologists, 107 radiologists) participated. 63.5 % patients and 63.2 % technologists rated interest in medical TV shows ≥5 (scale 1-10) versus 38.3 % of radiologists. All groups noted regular (every 2nd/3rd show) to >1/show appearance of radiological examinations in 58.5-88.2 % compared to 21.0-46.2 % for radiological staff appearance. Radiology played a role in diagnosis-making regularly to >1/show in 45.3-52.6 %. There is a positive correlation for interest in medical TV and the perception that radiology is accurately portrayed for patients (r = 0.49; P = 0.001) and technologists (r = 0.38; P = 0.001) but not for radiologists (r = 0.01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The majority of patients perceive the portrayed content as accurate. Radiologists should be aware of this cultivation effect to understand their patients' behaviour which may create false expectations towards radiological examinations and potential safety hazards.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  • Radiology in medical TV shows is conveyed as important in diagnosis making • Presence of radiological staff is less frequent compared to examinations shown • Positive correlation for interest in medical TV and radiology perceived as accurate • TV experience may create false expectations and potential safety hazards.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Switzerland. tobias.heye@usb.ch.|Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Road, Box 3808, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. tobias.heye@usb.ch.
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Heye
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
authors.forename: E M
authors.initials: EM
authors.lastname: Merkle
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.|Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC, 27157, USA.
authors.forename: J R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Leyendecker
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
authors.forename: D T
authors.initials: DT
authors.lastname: Boll
authors.affiliation: Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Road, Box 3808, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
authors.forename: R T
authors.initials: RT
authors.lastname: Gupta
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010465:Perception; D000072177:Radiologists; D011871:Radiology / Q000379:methods*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013690:Television
keywords: Medical TV shows; Patients; Portrayal; Radiology; Survey