ArticleBMC health services research2017
Are physicians aware enough of patient radiation protection? Results from a survey among physicians of Pavia District- Italy.
Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge and Awareness of Ionizing Radiation Harms Among Hospital Employees at a Large Tertiary Medical Center: Findings from a First-of-Its-Kind Study in Israel.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Knowledge and attitudes toward [BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Awareness of radiation risks by medical students & referrers requesting radiological examinations in the North of Scotland: an audit.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Comparison of 96-kV and 120-kV cone-beam CT for the assessment of cochlear implants.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- The importance of public health in radiology and radiation protection.Journal of public health research · 2021Article
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
backgroundRadiological practices are the first anthropic sources of ionizing radiation exposure of the population. However, a review of recent publications underlines inadequate doctors' knowledge about doses imparted in medical practices and about patient protection that might explain unnecessary radiological prescriptions. We investigated the knowledge of the physicians of Pavia District (Italy) on the risk of radiation exposure.
methodsA cross sectional study was performed involving the Medical Association of Pavia District. Data were collected with a self-administered questionnaire, available on-line with private login and password.
resultsFour hundred nineteen physicians fulfilled the questionnaire; 48% of participants reported training about radiation protection. The average percentage of correct answers on the knowledge on ionizing radiation was 62.29%, with a significantly higher result between radiologist. Around 5 and 13% of the responders do not know that, respectively, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance do not expose patients to ionizing radiations. Only 5% of the physicians properly identified the cancer risk rate associated to abdomen computed tomography.
conclusionsThe findings show a quite good level of the general knowledge about ionizing radiations, higher that reported in literature. Nevertheless, we believe the usefulness of training on the risk linked to radiation exposure in medicine for physicians employed in every area.
Indexed as
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.