The phrase "abnormality on a" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you are discussing a specific abnormality related to a particular subject, such as a medical condition or a scientific observation.
Example: "The doctor noted an abnormality on a recent MRI scan that required further investigation."
Alternatives: "anomaly in a" or "irregularity on a".
The inference that missing an abnormality on a specific radiograph automatically constitutes malpractice is not correct [7].
The ability of an experienced radiologist to rapidly detect an abnormality on a mammogram may build upon this general capacity.
The distinction between "acceptably" or "understandably" failing to perceive or report an abnormality on a radiological study and negligently failing to report a lesion is an important one, albeit one that is difficult to explain to laypersons or juries.
"[F]rom a practical point of view once an abnormality on a radiograph is pointed out and becomes so obvious that lay persons sitting as jurors can see it, it is not easy to convince them that a radiologist who is trained and paid for seeing the lesion should be exonerated for missing it.
As Berlin wrote: "[F]rom a practical point of view once an abnormality on a radiograph is pointed out and becomes so obvious that lay persons sitting as jurors can see it, it is not easy to convince them that a radiologist who is trained and paid for seeing the lesion should be exonerated for missing it.
Finding an abnormality on a plain chest radiograph is usually the first definite evidence of a lung cancer, so this investigation is currently pivotal in the diagnosis of the disease.
The Ebelings recommended a veterinarian they knew, Dr. Doug Herthel, who identified the joint abnormality on an X-ray.
When a medical doctor unskilled in WCE identifies an abnormality on an image in a training system, ground truth data, which include the period between the abnormality's appearance and disappearance, as well as the abnormality's type and location, are needed to decide whether the identification is correct.
Of all the additional tests, 123 (80%) were prompted by an abnormality on an MRI that required further investigation.
This seems unlikely particularly as surveillance is a key role of intensive care nurses [10]: having two nurses detect an abnormality on one day will not compensate for an undetected abnormality on another.
The new recommendation said that if a woman had no abnormalities on a Pap test for three years in a row, she could safely get the test less often, at the discretion of her physician.
