tirads-calculator.com/ is committed to providing accurate, transparent, and well-sourced educational content about thyroid nodule risk stratification. This Editorial Policy outlines the standards we hold ourselves to and explains how our content is created, reviewed, and maintained.
Our Mission
We exist to make the ACR TI-RADS scoring system easier to understand and use — for radiologists and residents who want a fast, reliable reference tool, for sonographers documenting findings, and for patients seeking to understand their ultrasound reports in plain language.
Primary Source Standard
All clinical content on this Site is grounded in the ACR TI-RADS 2017 white paper (Tessler FN, Middleton WD, Grant EG, et al., J Am Coll Radiol 2017;14:587–595), the ACR TI-RADS User’s Guide, and current peer-reviewed medical literature published in recognized journals.
Every clinical claim, risk estimate, scoring value, and management recommendation on this Site is traceable to a specific published source. We do not publish clinical information based solely on anecdotal evidence, unsourced claims, or unverified third-party content.
Medical Review Process
Clinical articles and the calculator’s scoring logic are reviewed by a qualified healthcare professional with relevant credentials in radiology, endocrinology, or a related medical specialty. The reviewer’s name, credentials, and the date of review are displayed on all reviewed content.
Our medical review process verifies the following for each piece of clinical content:
- Factual accuracy against the cited primary source
- Clinical relevance and appropriate context
- Correct representation of risk figures and management thresholds
- Clear distinction between educational information and medical advice
- Appropriate medical disclaimers
Calculator Validation
The TI-RADS calculator’s scoring engine has been validated against the original ACR white paper. The specific values verified include:
- Point assignments for all five feature categories (composition, echogenicity, shape, margin, echogenic foci)
- Category thresholds (TR1 = 0 points, TR2 = 2 points, TR3 = 3 points, TR4 = 4–6 points, TR5 = 7+ points)
- Estimated malignancy risk percentages for each category
- Size-based FNA and follow-up ultrasound thresholds for TR3, TR4, and TR5
Where the original publication is silent on an edge case (such as a 1-point total), our interpretation is documented transparently within the tool.
Independence and Advertising
This Site is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with or endorsed by the American College of Radiology.
If advertising, sponsored content, or affiliate links appear on this Site, they are clearly identified and never influence our clinical content, scoring logic, medical review process, or editorial decisions. Our editorial judgment is not for sale.
Dual-Audience Approach
We write for two audiences simultaneously: healthcare professionals who need clinical precision and patients who need clear, accessible explanations. Where appropriate, our articles include clearly labeled sections for each audience so that clinical nuance and patient-friendly language coexist without compromising either.
Corrections Policy
Accuracy is more important than pride. If you identify a factual error, outdated information, or a concern with any content or calculator logic on this Site, please contact us . We will review the report, correct verified errors promptly, and acknowledge the correction where appropriate.
Content Review Cycle
All published clinical content is reviewed at minimum on an annual basis and whenever the underlying clinical guidelines are updated or revised. The “Last updated” date on each page reflects the most recent review.
Last updated: July 2026