Incidental findings (IFs) are defined as a “mass or lesion, detected by an imaging examination performed for an unrelated reason” [ 1 Berland L.L. Overview of white papers of the ACR incidental findings committee ii on adnexal, vascular, splenic, nodal, gallbladder, and biliary findings. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013; 10: 672-674 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar ]. Approximately a quarter of imaging tests will identify an IF, with nearly a third of CT scans revealing one [ 2 O’Sullivan J.W. Muntinga T. Grigg S. Ioannidis J.P.A. Prevalence and outcomes of incidental imaging findings: umbrella review. BMJ. 2018; 361: 1-13 Google Scholar , 3 Lumbreras B. Donat L. Hernández-Aguado I. Incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests: a systematic review. Br J Radiol. 2010; 83: 276-289 Crossref PubMed Scopus (201) Google Scholar ]. As CT utilization has grown since the 1970s, the prevalence and burden of IFs have increased [ 1 Berland L.L. Overview of white papers of the ACR incidental findings committee ii on adnexal, vascular, splenic, nodal, gallbladder, and biliary findings. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013; 10: 672-674 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar ]. The ACR IF Committee has published white papers outlining imaging and clinical criteria for follow-up of IFs that may represent early cancer [ 4 Publications by the ACR IF Committee. Available at: https://publish.smartsheet.com/42d18e874a164318a0f702481f2fbb70. Accessed September 11, 2020. Google Scholar ]. However, institutional programs enabling tracking follow-up recommendations and assurance of follow-up tests’ completion for IFs remain sparse [ 5 Wandtke B. Gallagher S. Reducing delay in diagnosis: multistage recommendation tracking. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 209: 970-975 Crossref PubMed Scopus (17) Google Scholar ]. Relevance of Physician Attitudes Toward Incidental Findings for Radiology PracticeJournal of the American College of RadiologyVol. 18Issue 10PreviewWe share the concerns of Moore et al on the need to consider differing attitudes among radiologists and clinicians toward incidental findings (IFs) when seeking to improve the quality of care, and we extend the idea [1]. It has also been our experience that IFs are commonly encountered, particularly in examinations involving CT, and are often of potential clinical significance [2]. Failure to appropriately follow up or further investigate IFs represents a risk to physicians (at both ends) and to patients. Full-Text PDF