Radiologic images (RIs) and pathologic images (PIs) frequently accompany articles in the medical literature and when used correctly enhance the reader's experience. The interpretation of RIs and PIs is performed by radiologists and pathologists, respectively, and choosing relevant images for articles is a task best suited to these specialists. Previous research has demonstrated that fewer than 20% of articles containing a RI had a radiologist listed as an author(1). The failure of qualified peer review has led to the publication of misleading images(2–4), degrading the...

A systematic search of two Australian‐based non‐radiology non-pathology journals [ANZ Journal of Surgery (ANZJSurg) and Internal Medicine Journal] was conducted for articles published in 2020. Only original research and case report type articles were included in the final review process. Articles were evaluated for visual content relating to (a) medical imaging and radiological investigation, and (b) pathologic imaging including gross specimens and histological slides. The author and acknowledgements section of relevant articles was examined.

1145 articles met inclusion criteria; 443 (38.7%) contained one or more radiologic image (RI), and 111 (9.7%) contained one or more pathologic image (PI). Over half (52%) of all included ANZJSurg articles contained a RI. Approximately two-thirds of articles originated in Australia (67.4%), the remainder from New Zealand (5.9%) and internationally (26.9%). CT was the most common modality (79%) followed by MRI (16.5%), X-ray (12.6%) and ultrasound (7.9%). 53/443 articles (12%) containing a RI involved a radiologist in the authorship process, whilst 79/111 articles (71.2%)...

Whilst the use of RIs in non-radiology journals appears to be increasing, this study has shown radiologists are being utilised less frequently in the authorship process, down from 17.3% in 2014/15 to 12% in 2021(1). This is a concerning trend; the lack of specialist input opens these journals up to the possibility of publishing inaccurate content. In addition, pathologists are significantly more likely to be involved in the authorship process when PIs are included in articles, compared to radiologists when RIs are included; this discrepancy...

Stewart M, Sutherland T. Our place in the (medical literature) universe; the publication of radiologic images by non-radiologists. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018;62(S2):138. Stuckey S. Radiology images. Intern Med J. 2010;40(12):868–868. Sutherland T. Flawed peer-review process. Intern Med J. 2014;44(7):714–714. Sutherland T. Ongoing peer-review issues. Intern Med J. 2020;50(5):646–646.