ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2021
Awareness of radiation hazards in patients attending radiology departments.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Reconstruction and Validation of Arterial Geometries for Computational Fluid Dynamics Using Multiple Temporal Frames of 4D Flow-MRI Magnitude Images.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2023Article
- The why, who, how, and what of communicating CT radiation risks to patients and healthcare providers.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- Identifying Root Causes of Important Service Failures across Medical Examination Processes with Integration of 4M1E, ITLV, GRA, DEMATEL and FMEA.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Radiation dose and cancer risks from radiation exposure during abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scans: comparison of diagnostic and radiotherapy treatment planning CT scans.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evaluating the knowledge of patients attending radiology departments regarding ionizing radiation used in medical imaging and its associated hazards can provide knowledge of the patient's awareness level of the associated risk of the radiation used in medical imaging. The aims of this study were to evaluate the awareness of patients regarding medical radiation types used in medical diagnostic imaging and its influence on their decision to proceed with that procedure. Over an 8-months period, a total of 418 patients, 48% Men and 52% Women, presenting for diagnostic imaging in the department of radiology, completed a 15-point questionnaire. The questionnaire included demographic and radiation awareness sections. Less than 32% of the participants had a potential risk of radiation explained by the doctor before the procedure. 59% of the participants expressed that the potential risk of radiation makes them anxious; less than about 25% of the participants showed that the potential risk of radiation affects their decision to have the procedure. Overall, the data collected from this survey indicate that there is a lack of information about radiation risk provided to the patients prior to the diagnostic procedure. Efforts should be made to ensure that patients receiving multiple medical imaging tests are aware of the radiation they are receiving.
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.