Peer learning workflow overviewTopic number: 1526973902335
Within peer learning workflows, radiologists provide individual and group feedback on reports, share knowledge with peers, and indicate learning opportunities.
Use cases for peer learning
A peer learning workflow can be started in the following cases:
- Users want to share interesting studies with peers or trainees.
- Users find a gap in a work procedure.
- Users detect a learning opportunity while reading a study.
- The outcome of a surgery conference is different from the report conclusion and offers a teaching case for radiologists.
- Pathology comes back and the result is different from what was assumed in the report.
- Cases are created as a result of risk management meetings.
Use cases for peer review
A peer learning workflow can be also used for peer review in the following cases:
- Evaluation of radiologists’ performance (for example, 100% of reports created by a new radiologist are reviewed).
- Quality assessment campaign as part of the accreditation process. For example, 10% of a radiologist’s reports on CT procedures must be reviewed by colleagues every year.
- Second reading.
Examples of peer learning workflows
The administrator can configure a peer learning workflow by granting permissions to users to perform tasks. Two main peer learning workflows are explained below.
1) Peer learning workflow for radiologists (simple workflow)
Simple peer learning workflow that can be used by peers to identify the report author is replaced with asterisks in the following fields:
In the basic workflow, radiologists process peer learning cases by performing the following tasks:
| Task with icon | Role | Description |
|---|---|---|
|
|
Case submitters, such as radiologists, technologists, and clinicians | Cases can be created:
When performing a new case task, a radiologist (not the report author) evaluates a report, assigns a score to it, and adds comments. If no other actions must be performed for the current case, the radiologist can close the case. Alternatively, the radiologist can request feedback or submit the case for discussion at a conference. |
 Case feedback | Radiologist | By creating this task, a radiologist requests feedback on a conclusion from another user, such as the report author. The user to whom the task is assigned provides feedback and sends it to the requester. New case after feedback is assigned back to the original requester. |
 Discussion | Radiologists, Conference owner | Cases with discrepancies or those providing a learning opportunity are analyzed by a group of radiologists. |
New case2) Peer learning workflow for radiologists (extensive workflow)
Extensive peer learning workflow
In the extensive workflow, radiologists perform new case tasks and send cases to the program administrator (for example, head of department or senior radiologist) as a case review task for further processing. In this workflow, the program administrator performs case review and, if required, creates or performs case follow-up tasks:
| Task with icon | Role | Description |
|---|---|---|
|
| Program administrator |
When reviewing a case, the program administrator analyzes the report and images, checks the entered data on the peer learning panel, the wording, rewords some content to avoid confronting statements and possibly asks any user for feedback. The program administrator can also notify the report author, if the report will be discussed at a conference. |
|
| Program administrator |
The task assignee follows up on corrective actions defined by the program administrator when reviewing a case or by the quality assessment committee during a conference. Once the necessary actions are taken, the case can be closed. |
Case review
Case follow-upPurpose of de-identification
To maintain objectivity and prevent bias, sensitive information in the following fields is replaced with asterisks:
- Patient ID
- Patient name
- Accession number (study level)
- Report author
- Report signed by
- Report contributor
- Reading physician
- Case submitter
 | Important! De-identification is not yet supported when sharing your screen during a conference, or when sharing the Image area with other people via the collaborator tool. In case you need to share the images of a certain study with colleagues in other locations, we recommend using a video conferencing tool. |
The link History in the Text area is also disabled.
De-identification can be set at the system and conference levels:
| System-level de-identification | Conference-level de-identification |
|---|---|
|
If the administrator has enabled the Enable de-identification of peer learning workflow tasks option, sensitive information is hidden during new case, case review, case feedback, and case follow-up tasks. If a user has the Can overrule system-level de-identification permission, this user can unhide sensitive data by selecting in the List area. |
If the administrator or a user has checked the De-identify option when creating or editing a conference, sensitive information is hidden during discussion tasks of that conference. If a user has the Can overrule conference-level de-identification permission, this user can unhide sensitive data by clicking in the Text area during a discussion task or in the List area when discussion tasks are listed. |
Access to peer learning data
During peer learning tasks, users enter data and select attachment values on the Peer learning tab.
For example, when submitting a new case, a user can type an explanation why a study was selected in the Narrative field and assign to the report a peer review score, such as 1. Concur or 3a. Discrepancy.
Whether or not a user can view, add, or delete the content of a certain attachment on the Peer learning tab, and configure a search field or column for this attachment in the Search area or List area is defined by granted permissions.
Depending on a user’s permissions, the following default attachments can be configured on the Peer learning tab within a peer learning workflow:
| Attachment name | Description |
|---|---|
| Learning program | Identifier of a learning program. |
| Narrative | Short description of a suggested learning opportunity. |
| Observations | Additional observations made during the peer learning workflow. |
| Peer review score | Score to indicate the diagnostic accuracy of a
report. Default values correspond to the RADPEER scoring system:
|
| Score | A score given by the case submitter. Default values are the following: Agree and Disagree. |
| Attachment name | Attachment type |
|---|---|
| Clinical history | Clinical history relevant to the current peer learning case. |
| Peer learning conference comments | Comments made during peer learning conferences. |
| Attachment name | Attachment type |
|---|---|
| Action history | Registration of actions performed (for example, by the program administrator) during peer learning workflow tasks. |
| Action items | List of action items to achieve a learning goal, for example, to review similar studies or to attend a training. |
| Case submitter | User initiating the case. |
| Classification | Classification of a peer learning case. Default values are the following: Perception, Interpretation, Communication, Process/Systems issue. |
| Clinical follow-up | Clinical follow-up items, for example, actions required if clinically relevant discrepancies were detected. |
| Learning points | List of learning points. |
| Case rejected | A flag that is set to True if someone rejects the case. |
| Report excerpts | Snippets of related reports, for example, from the active or prior report. |
Users can view the Peer learning tab if they perform a peer learning task. They can also access the Peer learning tab outside the peer learning workflow, for example, when opening a study to check for feedback. For this, they need the Can view case outside peer learning workflow permission. By default, the permission is configured as follows:
| Role | Permission set | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Program administrators | Administrator - peer learning permissions | The Can view case outside peer learning workflow permission is granted. Users can view peer learning data at any time. |
| Case reviewers, Conference owners | Power user - peer learning permissions |
The Can view case outside peer learning workflow permission has the condition Only if the user contributes to the study as Report contributor, Case contributor. Users can access only peer learning cases for their reports or cases to which they contributed. Users are considered case contributors if they are assignees of any peer learning task or if they are case submitters. |
| Case submitters, radiologists performing new case tasks | Standard user - peer learning permissions |
Peer learning and markup data
We recommend not to add any markup data to images during the peer learning workflow because this data is included when a study is exported.
Customization of peer learning attachments
Your administrator can adapt the peer learning attachment model to your peer learning or peer review process by deactivating existing peer learning attachments and creating new ones.