EDITORIAL
“Readers’ Opinion” Phillip M. Boiselle, MD
W
ith each issue of JTI, we post a new “Quick Poll” on our website in order to seek our readers’ opinions regarding timely topics addressed in one of our new articles or editorial features. We are pleased to share the results of two popular polls from 2013, along with companion references for further reading. We encourage you to participate in our latest poll at http://www.thoracicimaging.com September 2013 Are you currently performing quantitative CT in your practice? Yes, but only in research setting (5 responses, 26%) Yes (1 response, 5%) No, but we are planning to do it in the future (1 response, 5%) No (12 responses, 63%)
For further reading, please see the article “Quantitative Computed Tomography in Chronic Pulmonary Disease”1 and the related Expert Opinion feature.2 November 2013 Which test–MRI or CT–is better for evaluating congenital heart disease in young adults? MRI (17 responses, 85%) CT (3 responses, 15%)
For further reading, please see the article “Adult Congenital Heart Disease: A Practical Approach”3 and the related Expert Opinion feature.4 REFERENCES 1. Lynch DA, Al-Qaisi MA. Quantitative computed tomography in chronic pulmonary disease. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:284–290. 2. Boiselle PM, Crapo JD, Han MK, et al. Expert opinion: how can quantitative CT benefit patients with COPD and idiopathic interstitial pneumonias? J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:263. 3. Latson L, Levsky JM, Haramati LB. Adult congenital heart disease: a practical approach. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:332–346. 4. Boiselle PM, Bremerich J, DeRoos A, et al. Expert opinion: computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for young adults with congenital heart disease. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:331.
The author declares no conflicts of interest Copyright r 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
J Thorac Imaging
Volume 29, Number 2, March 2014
www.thoracicimaging.com |
67
“Readers’ Opinion” Phillip M. Boiselle, MD
W
ith each issue of JTI, we post a new “Quick Poll” on our website in order to seek our readers’ opinions regarding timely topics addressed in one of our new articles or editorial features. We are pleased to share the results of two popular polls from 2013, along with companion references for further reading. We encourage you to participate in our latest poll at http://www.thoracicimaging.com September 2013 Are you currently performing quantitative CT in your practice? Yes, but only in research setting (5 responses, 26%) Yes (1 response, 5%) No, but we are planning to do it in the future (1 response, 5%) No (12 responses, 63%)
For further reading, please see the article “Quantitative Computed Tomography in Chronic Pulmonary Disease”1 and the related Expert Opinion feature.2 November 2013 Which test–MRI or CT–is better for evaluating congenital heart disease in young adults? MRI (17 responses, 85%) CT (3 responses, 15%)
For further reading, please see the article “Adult Congenital Heart Disease: A Practical Approach”3 and the related Expert Opinion feature.4 REFERENCES 1. Lynch DA, Al-Qaisi MA. Quantitative computed tomography in chronic pulmonary disease. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:284–290. 2. Boiselle PM, Crapo JD, Han MK, et al. Expert opinion: how can quantitative CT benefit patients with COPD and idiopathic interstitial pneumonias? J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:263. 3. Latson L, Levsky JM, Haramati LB. Adult congenital heart disease: a practical approach. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:332–346. 4. Boiselle PM, Bremerich J, DeRoos A, et al. Expert opinion: computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for young adults with congenital heart disease. J Thorac Imaging. 2013;28:331.
The author declares no conflicts of interest Copyright r 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
J Thorac Imaging
Volume 29, Number 2, March 2014
www.thoracicimaging.com |
67
