Skip to Content

Do radiologists make mistakes?

As medical imaging technology has advanced over the past few decades, radiologists have become increasingly relied upon to interpret the images and provide accurate diagnoses. However, some may wonder – do radiologists ever make mistakes? The answer is yes, radiologists are human and not infallible. Like all medical professionals, they can and do make occasional errors. However, the rate of clinically significant errors in radiology is quite low.

How often do radiologists make errors?

Studies looking at radiologist diagnostic accuracy have found error rates ranging from 2-20%. However, the vast majority of these are minor errors that do not significantly impact patient care. Truly clinically significant errors, meaning misdiagnoses that could potentially lead to patient harm, occur at a much lower rate.

A large meta-analysis examining the rates of diagnostic errors in radiology found a mean clinically significant error rate of just 3.8% for X-rays, CT scans, MRI scans and ultrasound imaging. The error rates varied somewhat depending on the type of imaging, with a 2.7% error rate for X-rays, 4.1% for CT, 3.3% for MRI, and 3.9% for ultrasound. However, overall these are very low rates considering the complexity of many of the cases radiologists interpret on a daily basis.

What types of errors do radiologists make?

There are several common categories of errors that radiologists can make:

– Perceptual errors – Not noticing an abnormal finding that is visible on the image. This is the most common type of radiologist error.

– Cognitive errors – Misinterpreting a finding on an image or reaching an incorrect diagnosis.

– Satisfaction of search errors – Detecting one abnormal finding but failing to notice additional findings.

– Communication errors – Errors conveying imaging results to clinicians that could lead to misdiagnosis.

– Technical errors – Issues with imaging technique, contrast timing, patient positioning, etc. that degrade image quality.

While all radiologists are vulnerable to make such mistakes at times, the likelihood increases when radiologists are overloaded, stressed, or fatigued.

What factors lead to radiologist errors?

Several factors can increase the chances of diagnostic errors:

– Complex cases – Cases with subtle, equivocal or atypical findings are more prone to misinterpretation.

– Poor image quality – Blocked anatomy, motion artifacts, inappropriate contrast timing.

– Lack of clinical history – Radiologists rely on clinical details to support their reads. Missing information can lead to misdiagnosis.

– Heavy workload – Fatigue from interpreting too many studies heightens the risk of errors.

– Cognitive biases – Confirmation bias, anchoring bias, premature closure of diagnosis.

– Lack of specialized expertise – General radiologists may miss findings a subspecialist would detect.

– Inadequate communication – With patients and referring clinicians. Missing key details that would change diagnosis.

– Distractions – Noise, interruptions, chaotic reading environments.

How are radiology error rates tracked?

There is no national repository that tracks radiologist diagnostic errors comprehensively. However, many radiology practices monitor their radiologists’ performance through ongoing quality assurance programs. These help identify interpreters prone to high error rates that may require remediation or replacement.

Some of the quality assurance practices used to track radiologist accuracy include:

– **Double reads** – Having a second radiologist provide a secondary interpretation acts as an immediate check. Differences are resolved by consensus.

– **Clinical outcomes monitoring** – Following up on imaging findings with patients’ subsequent clinical course helps confirm accuracy.

– **Patient callbacks** – Calling patients back when significant findings are identified checks that radiologists have not missed anything major.

– **Random case audits** – Peer review of a random sample of cases helps estimate overall error rates.

– **Discrepancy meetings** – Focused review of known misses or disagreements in interpretation.

– **Tracking sentinel events** – Major diagnostic errors that lead to patient harm are analyzed to determine cause.

Double read discrepancy rates

One of the most common methods for monitoring diagnostic accuracy is tracking double read discrepancy rates. Having two radiologists independently interpret the same imaging study allows direct comparison of their interpretations. While single read error rates are 2-20%, double read discrepancy rates are much lower, averaging around 2-5% for most modalities:

Imaging modality Double read discrepancy rate
X-ray 2.7%
CT 4.4%
MRI 3.5%
Ultrasound 5.1%

This reflects the fact that many potential errors are caught when a second radiologist provides oversight.

Impact of clinical outcomes monitoring

Analyzing discrepancies between radiology interpretations and patients’ eventual clinical outcomes is another insightful method for identifying potential errors. One study across 4 academic hospitals found clinically significant errors in 2.7% of CT scan interpretations when corroborated with patient outcomes:

Total CT scans read 10,128
Clinically significant errors 274 (2.7%)

This real-world data based on actual patient outcomes provides a good estimate of the rate of meaningful errors that could impact patient care.

What is being done to reduce radiologist errors?

There are a number of initiatives and practices the radiology community has implemented to combat diagnostic errors:

Double reads and computer-aided diagnosis

Having studies interpreted by two radiologists improves diagnostic accuracy. Computer algorithms can also act as a “second reader” helping flag findings the first radiologist may have missed. CAD is not perfect, but research shows it boosts cancer detection by 7-10% on average.


Radiologists develop expertise interpreting specific types of studies and imaging particular anatomy when they subspecialize. Subspecialist radiologists have substantially lower error rates interpreting studies within their specialty.

Structured reporting

Standardized report templates ensure radiologists address all pertinent findings completely and systematically without oversights.

Clinical decision support systems

Software that provides context-specific reference information, alerts and reminders at the point of interpretation helps combat cognitive biases and memory lapses.

Reducing distractions

Designated quiet reading rooms, noise-cancelling headphones, protocols minimizing interruptions during reads all aim to improve radiologists’ focus.

Managing workload

Reasonable reading volumes, built-in breaks, and workload balancing lower the risk of fatigue. Policies on shift duration and overnight reads help keep radiologists sharp.

Ongoing education

Case conferences, lectures, online learning and quizzes help radiologists stay up-to-date on best practices and hone their diagnostic skills.


Like any medical specialty, radiology is not immune to occasional errors. However, research shows radiologists have very high levels of diagnostic accuracy overall. With subspecialization, clinical decision support, quality assurance practices, and ongoing education, error rates should continue to diminish. By understanding the factors that lead to diagnostic errors, radiologists can take proactive steps to reduce their likelihood. While mistakes may still occur, radiologists strive for continuous quality improvement in providing safe patient care.