ArticleInsights into imaging2015
Radiation awareness among radiology residents, technologists, fellows and staff: where do we stand?
Article in Insights into imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do urologists actually comply with the ALARA principle in pediatric urolithiasis management?Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Article
- Awareness of radiation risks by medical students & referrers requesting radiological examinations in the North of Scotland: an audit.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- An audit of patient radiation doses in interventional radiology at a South African hospital.SA journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Analysis of the appropriateness of orthopaedic computed tomography scans as exemplified by lower extremity bones and joints.Polish journal of radiology · 2022Article
- The importance of public health in radiology and radiation protection.Journal of public health research · 2021Article
- An assessment of medical students' proficiency regarding the hazards of radiological examinations on the health of workers and patients: a cross-sectional study from Palestine.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2020Article
- The experiences of teleradiology end users regarding role extension in a rural district of the North West province: A qualitative analysis.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2020Article
- Awareness about radiation hazards and knowledge about radiation protection among healthcare personnel: A quaternary care academic center-based study.SAGE open medicine · 2020Article
- Medical doctors' awareness of radiation exposure in diagnostic radiology investigations in a South African academic institution.SA journal of radiology · 2019Article
- Radiation Protection Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) in Interventional Radiology.Oman medical journal · 2018Article
- Pathogenesis, Clinical Features, Diagnosis, and Management of Radiation Hazards in Dentistry.The open dentistry journal · 2018Review
- Awareness and knowledge of radiation dose and associated risks among final year medical students in Norway.Insights into imaging · 2017Article
- Simulator training to minimize ionizing radiation exposure in the catheterization laboratory.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2017Article
- Radiation awareness among dentists, radiographers and students.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2016Article
- Knowledge of Radiation Hazards, Radiation Protection Practices and Clinical Profile of Health Workers in a Teaching Hospital in Northern Nigeria.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Imaging More Imagining less: An Insight into Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Regarding Radiation Risk on Pregnant Women among Dentists of Ghaziabad - A Cross Sectional Study.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Ionizing Radiation Impacts on Cardiac Differentiation of Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells.Stem cells and development · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate and compare the knowledge of radiation dose and risk incurred in common radiology examinations among radiology residents, fellows, staff radiologists and technologists.
methodsA questionnaire containing 17 multiple choice questions was administered to all residents, technologists, fellows and staff radiologists of the department of medical imaging through the hospital group mailing list.
resultsA total of 92 responses was received. Mean score was 8.5 out of 17. Only 48 % of all participants scored more than 50 % correct answers. Only 23 % were aware of dose from both single-view and two-view chest X-ray; 50-70 % underestimated dose from common studies; 50-75 % underestimated the risk of fatal cancer. Awareness about radiation exposure in pregnancy is variable and particularly poor among technologists. A statistically significant comparative knowledge gap was found among technologists.
conclusionsOur results show a variable level of knowledge about radiation dose and risk among radiology residents, fellows, staff radiologists and technologists, but overall knowledge is inadequate in all groups. There is significant underestimation of dosage and cancer risk from common examinations, which could potentially lead to suboptimal risk assessment and excessive or unwarranted studies posing significant radiation hazard to the patient and radiology workers. MAIN MESSAGES: • Knowledge of radiation dose and risk is poor among all radiology workers. • Significant knowledge gap among technologists compared to residents, fellows and staff radiologists. • Significant underestimation of radiation dose and cancer risk from common examinations.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.