title: Public transparency Web sites for radiology practices: prevalence of price, clinical quality, and service quality information.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess information regarding radiology practices on public transparency Web sites.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eight Web sites comparing radiology centers' price and quality were identified. Web site content was assessed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Six of eight Web sites reported examination prices. Other reported information included hours of operation (4/8), patient satisfaction (2/8), American College of Radiology (ACR) accreditation (3/8), on-site radiologists (2/8), as well as parking, accessibility, waiting area amenities, same/next-day reports, mammography follow-up rates, examination appropriateness, radiation dose, fellowship-trained radiologists, and advanced technologies (1/8 each).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Transparency Web sites had a preponderance of price (and to a lesser extent service quality) information, risking fostering price-based competition at the expense of clinical quality.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY 10016 USA. Electronic address: Andrew.Rosenkrantz@nyumc.org.
authors.forename: Andrew B
authors.initials: AB
authors.lastname: Rosenkrantz
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY 10016 USA. Electronic address: ankur.doshi@nyumc.org.
authors.forename: Ankur M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Doshi
mesh_terms: D022126:Access to Information; D019985:Benchmarking; D054626:Consumer Health Information / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005249:Fees and Charges / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D020407:Internet; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011859:Radiography / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011871:Radiology / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D014481:United States
keywords: Price; Quality; Radiology practice; Transparency; Value