ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2022
Using the theory of planned behaviour to determine radiation protection among South African diagnostic radiographers: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Theory of optimising radiation protection among diagnostic radiographers depicted as a model.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2024Article
- Compliance with radiation protection among radiographers in Eswatini public health facilities.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2024Article
- Article
- Using the theory of planned behaviour to determine radiation protection among South African diagnostic radiographers: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe use of ionising radiation in medicine accounts for the majority of radiation exposure from artificial sources. Therefore, all measures to safeguard against unnecessary radiation exposure must be taken. As radiographers are central to radiation protection, this study aimed to determine South African radiographers' attitude towards radiation protection, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control concerning radiation protection.
methodsThis quantitative cross-sectional study used an online theory of a planned behaviour radiation protection questionnaire shared through social media platforms from August 2019 to February 2020. Diagnostic radiographers registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa and employed at radiology departments in South Africa were invited to participate in the study.
resultsFour hundred and seventeen radiographers in South Africa responded to the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (90%, n = 376) plan to use radiation protection; however, only 16% continuously used radiation protection in the past. Respondents felt that using radiation protection was extremely good (72.2%), pleasant (47%), beneficial (74.1%), rewarding (55.2%) and worth the time (52.5%); 57% of respondents indicated that using radiation protection takes longer to complete the examination. Respondents report that approval from patients (43.5%), patients' family (32%), radiographer coworkers (31%), radiology managers (47%) and radiologists (43.9%) is very much important to them.
conclusionThe study shows that even though fewer respondents use radiation protection at present, most respondents plan and intend to use radiation protection measures. Respondents felt that radiation protection was good and beneficial, with some respondents feeling that radiation protection is not worth the time, which coincide with lengthening the examination. Overall, South African radiographers' attitudes towards radiation protection, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control and radiation protection intention were high.
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.