A formal neuroradiology second opinion service changes management in one in five cases: a retrospective cohort study of discrepancies and types of errors

The authors aimed to quantify the discrepancy rates between referring reports and subspecialist neuroradiology second-opinion reports, as well as to assess the clinical impact of these discrepancies. Their retrospective study found that over 42% of cases had discrepancies, with nearly 21% being major discrepancies that often led to significant changes in diagnosis and treatment. The study highlighted faulty reasoning as the predominant error type, suggesting the need for targeted quality improvement in neuroradiology interpretations.