Cleareview has my strongest endorsement. As a litigator who frequently tries medical malpractice cases, I can directly attribute some of my successful trial outcomes to the use of Cleareview in radiology cases. Jurors are consistently impressed by my experts because of the fact that they conducted truly prospective reviews of the involved radiology studies in contrast to the other experts. Jurors truly understand hindsight bias and how only Cleareview has devised a method of eliminating this bias. You cannot go wrong with a “blind” review from Cleareview!
Rebecca Ringer, JD
Floyd, Pfluger & Ringer
“Cleareview is a great service that allows us to conduct truly blinded radiology reviews. It’s professional and easy to use.”
Brad Piscadlo, JD
Hodgkinson, Street & Mepham
“I thought I would be looking really closely at every case. After a while I realized that I wasn’t doing anything that different from what I do on a daily basis.”
David Levitsky, MD
Medical-legal reviews suffer from hindsight bias, which is hard to eliminate. I have often thought that the best way to determine the "standard of care" in a missed radiology diagnosis would be to slip the case into a routine worklist for multiple busy radiologists, and to see how often the finding was made.
Individual cases sent out to expert witnesses, even if they are doing "blinded reads", receive extra scrutiny, making the evaluations unrealistic.
Cleareview has come up with the best approach I have seen yet for reducing these biases. They send several cases, some normal, some not, with the key case embedded in the "stack".
I have impressed with the quality of the cases sets shown, and the software then reveals sample or real reports. It keeps you more "honest" than the typical isolated retrospective review.
I think the medico-legal system would do well to challenge experts to spot abnormalities in such a setting.
Erik Gaensler, MD
Walnut Creek, California