Developing protocols for advanced and consultant practice

References 

1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Available at www.nice.org.uk [accessed 11.01.08].
2. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Available at www.sign.ac.uk [accessed 13.01.08].
3. NHS Modernisation Agency, National Institute for Clinical Excellence. A step-by-step guide to developing protocols; 2002. http://www.nodelaysachiever.nhs.uk/Resources/ResourceGuideItems/A+Step+by+Step+Guide+to+Developing+Protocols.htm [accessed 30.03.08].
4. Alderson CJ, Hogg P. Advanced radiographic practice—the legal aspects. Radiography. 2003;9(4):305–314
5. Board of the Faculty of Clinical Radiology . Skills mix in clinical radiology. London: The Royal College of Radiologists; 1999;Ref BFCR(99)3
6. The College of Radiographers . Reporting by radiographers: a vision paper. London: The College of Radiographers; 1997;
7. Paterson AM, Price RC, Thomas A, Nuttall L. Reporting by radiographers: a policy and practice guide. Radiography. 2004;10:205–212
8. Owen A, Hogg P, Nightingale J. A critical analysis of a locally agreed protocol for clinical practice. Radiography. 2004;10:139–144
9. Anderson EDC, Muir BB, Walsh JS, Kirkpatrick AE. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol. 1994;49:248–251
   • Abstract
   • Full-Text PDF (419 KB)
   • CrossRef
10. Markus JB, Somers S, O'Malley BP, Stevenson GW. Double-contrast barium enema studies: effect of multiple reading on perception error. Radiology. 1990;175:155–156
    • MEDLINE
11. Leslie A, Virjee JP. Detection of colorectal carcinoma on double contrast barium enema when double reporting is routinely performed: an audit of current practice. Clin Radiol. 2002;57:184–187
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (113 KB)
    • CrossRef
12. Nightingale J. Reporting errors and how to avoid them. Synergy. February 2003;16–23
13. The College of Radiographers. Statements for professional conduct; 2004 [reprinted from 2002 with minor amendments].
14. Skills for Health. Completed competencies. http://www.skillsforhealth.org.uk/page/competences/completed-competences-projects/list [accessed 10.01.08].
15. Jones H, Manning D. A survey to assess audit mechanisms practised by skeletal reporting radiographers. Radiography. 2008;14(3):201–205
16. Tawn DJ, Squire CJ, Mohammed MA, Adam EJ. National audit of the sensitivity of double-contrast barium enema for colorectal carcinoma, using control charts. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:558–564
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (185 KB)
    • CrossRef
17. Bartram C. National audit of the sensitivity of double-contrast barium enema for colorectal carcinoma, using control charts. Commentary Clin Radiol. 2005;60(5):555–557
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (47 KB)
    • CrossRef
18. Brealey S. Measuring the effects of image interpretation: an evaluative framework. Clin Radiol. 2001;56:341–347
    • Abstract
    • Full-Text PDF (202 KB)
    • CrossRef
19. Loughborough University. Breast cancer screening takes another step forward thanks to Loughborough University, press release. Available at www.lboro.ac.uk/publicrelations/news-releases/2005/99_breast_screening.html [accessed 11.01.08].
20. Nakielny RA. Radiology discrepancy meetings. Royal College of Radiologists Autumn Meeting September 2002. Seen in: Melvin C, Bodley R, Booth A, Meagher T, Record C, Savage P. Managing errors in radiology: a working model. Clin Radiol 2004;59(9):841–45.
21. Board of the Faculty of Clinical Radiology . To err is human: the case for review of reporting discrepancies. London: The Royal College of Radiologists; 2002;Ref BFCR(01)4
22. Nightingale J, Hogg P. The gastrointestinal advanced practitioner: an emerging role for the modern radiology service. invited review article Radiography. May 2003;9(2):151–160
23. Crawley MT, Shine B, Booth A. Radiation dose and diagnosticity of barium enema examinations by radiographers and radiologists: a comparative study. Br J Radiol. 1998;71:399–405
    • MEDLINE