Radiology medmal cases concentrate on two scenarios: a finding visible in retrospect that was reported as normal, or a critical finding that was reported but never communicated directly to the ordering clinician. The ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings makes the second scenario a documented standard breach. Cross-exam locks the witness into the ACR floor and walks through the chart.
Try the 2-min Radiology demo → All specialtiesThe ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings requires direct verbal communication for critical results within an actionable timeframe. The chart either documents the call or it doesn't. For missed-finding cases, satisfaction-of-search bias and the ACR comprehensive-read requirement become the impeachment material.
Tumor visible in retrospect on prior imaging reported as normal; satisfaction-of-search bias.
PE/dissection/ICH reported in dictation but no documented direct verbal communication per ACR.
Intimal flap visible in retrospect on chest/abdomen CT; report didn't mention dissection.
Subsegmental or proximal PE visible in retrospect; report says "no PE."
Spiculated mass reported as BI-RADS 3 when descriptor warrants 4; biopsy recommendation absent.
Scaphoid / basilar skull / occult hip fracture visible in retrospect; report says "no acute findings."
Available prior imaging not cited in report; growth/stability assessment impossible.
Subspecialty study (neuro/peds/mammo) read after-hours by generalist; over-read timing not documented.
Lock the witness into "I was focused on the specific clinical question," then juxtapose against the ACR Practice Parameter requirement that every imaging study be read comprehensively for all abnormalities.
Why this lands: witness has just framed satisfaction-of-search bias as a defensible reading approach.
Radiology cases turn on either a missed finding (satisfaction-of-search bias) or a critical finding with no direct communication. Both have ACR Practice Parameter standards. Generic depo-prep AI doesn't engage the ACR canon.
ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings, ACR Practice Parameter for [Specific Imaging Study], ACR BI-RADS/Lung-RADS/TI-RADS/LI-RADS/PI-RADS standardized reporting.
Yes. Expert-prep mode runs the AI as hostile plaintiff counsel against your defense radiologist.
Bundled in MedLegal AI Pro ($49/mo), Professional ($249/mo), or Firm ($499/mo). Free 14-day trial, no credit card.
No signup, no mic. The cross-exam architecture transfers to radiology — lock witness into the ACR Practice Parameter, walk the report.
Run the 2-min demo → Start free 14-day trialDeposing a radiology expert on the other side? See questions to ask a radiology expert witness at deposition.