ArticleMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Radiologists' Knowledge and Attitudes towards CT Radiation Dose and Exposure in Saudi Arabia-A Survey Study.
Article in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Exploring Patient Preferences for Information About CT Radiation Exposure: Bridging the Gap Between Patient Preference and Physician Practice.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Assessment of radiographers' knowledge about radiation doses and DRLs in computed tomography departments in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023Article
- Reduction in Irradiation Dose in Aperture Coded Enhanced Computed Tomography Imager Using Super-Resolution Techniques.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Recommendations for reducing exposure to medical X-ray irradiation (Review).Medicine internationalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 9 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) is a key imaging technique in diagnostic radiology, providing highly sensitive and specific information. While its use has increased dramatically in recent years, the quantity and associated risks of radiation from CT scans present major challenges, particularly in paediatrics. The fundamental principles of radiation protection require that radiation quantities be as low as reasonably achievable and CT use must be justified, particularly for paediatric patients. CT radiation knowledge is a key factor in optimising and minimising radiation risk. The objective of this study was to analyse knowledge level, expertise, and competency regarding CT radiation dose and its hazards in paediatrics among radiologists in Saudi Arabian hospitals. A self-reported, multiple-choice questionnaire assessed the attitudes and opinions of radiologists involved in imaging studies using ionising radiation. Among the total respondents, 65% ± 13.5% had a good comprehension of the dangers of carcinogenicity to the patient resulting from CT scans, with 80% presuming that cancer risks were elevated. However, only 48.5%, 56.5%, and 65% of the respondents were aware of specific radiation risks in head, chest, and abdominal paediatric examinations, respectively. Regular, frequent, and specific training courses are suggested to improve the fundamental knowledge of CT radiation among radiologists and other physicians.
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.