ArticleEuropean radiology2016
Information about radiation dose and risks in connection with radiological examinations: what patients would like to know.
Article in European radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiation-Related Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Medical Imaging Among the General Population in Iraq: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Awareness of radiation risks by medical students & referrers requesting radiological examinations in the North of Scotland: an audit.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Impact of dental imaging on pregnant women and recommendations for fetal radiation safety: A systematic review.Imaging science in dentistry · 2024Review
- Communicating radiation dose in medical imaging: How to best inform our patients?Acta radiologica open · 2023Article
- Assessment of knowledge and perceptions of medical radiation among caregivers and adolescent patients in the paediatric emergency department.Singapore medical journal · 2021Article
- Patient understanding of diagnostic ultrasound examinations in an Australian private radiology clinic.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2021Article
- Patients' and radiographers' experiences of dose reducing abdominal compression in radiographic examinations-A qualitative study.Nursing open · 2020Article
- Identifying communication-related predictors of patient satisfaction in a briefing prior to contrast-enhanced computed tomography.Insights into imaging · 2019Article
- Parents' received and expected information about their child's radiation exposure during radiographic examinations.Pediatric radiology · 2019Article
- Complete written/oral information about dose exposure in CT: is it really useful to guarantee the patients' awareness about radiation risks?La Radiologia medica · 2018Article
- Awareness and knowledge of radiation dose and associated risks among final year medical students in Norway.Insights into imaging · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo find out patients' wishes for the content and sources of the information concerning radiological procedures.
methodsA questionnaire providing quantitative and qualitative data was prepared. It comprised general information, dose and risks of radiation, and source of information. Two tables demonstrating different options to indicate the dose or risks were also provided. Patients could give one or many votes. Altogether, 147 patients (18-85 years) were interviewed after different radiological examinations using these devices.
results95% (139/147) of the patients wished for dose and risk information. Symbols (78/182 votes) and verbal scale (56/182) were preferred to reveal the dose, while verbal (83/164) and numerical scale (55/164) on the risk of fatal cancer were preferred to indicate the risks. Wishes concerning the course, options and purpose of the examination were also expressed. Prescriber (3.9 on a scale 1-5), information letter (3.8) and radiographer (3.3) were the preferred sources. Patients aged 66-85 years were reluctant to choose electronic channels.
conclusionsApart from general information, patients wish for dose and risk information in connection with radiological examinations. The majority preferred symbols to indicate dose and verbal scales to indicate risks, and the preferred source of information was the prescriber or information letter. KEY POINTS: • 95% of patients expect information on the dose and risks of radiation. • Symbols and verbal scale are preferred to indicate the dose. • Verbal and numerical scales are preferred to indicate fatal cancer risk. • Patients expect information on course, options and purpose of examination. • Prescriber, information letter and radiographer are popular sources of the overall information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26134998What 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.