Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35732842›Full record

ReviewPediatric radiology2022

Diversity in radiology: the right thing to do, the smart thing to do.

Theodore R Hall, Kathleen Brown

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Theodore R HallUCLA Department of Radiology, Section of Pediatric Imaging, 757 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. thall@mednet.ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8916-7103
Kathleen BrownUCLA Department of Radiology, Section of Cardiothoracic Imaging, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5714-9434

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the 10-year period between the last two U.S. population censuses there have been significant changes in the U.S. population demography. The changes in self-reporting of racial and ethnic identity afforded by the most recent U.S. population census in 2020 have given citizens the opportunity to be represented in ways that truly reflect how they wish to be identified. At the same time, the diversity of the health care workforce in radiology has not reflected a similar change. While there have been small incremental changes for underrepresented groups (African Americans/Blacks, Hispanic ethnicity, and the group American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander), these changes have not kept pace with the ever-changing demographics of the U.S. population. Part of the answer for these very modest gains must lie with our selection processes for identifying potential candidates from underrepresented in medicine groups (URiM) for acceptance to our medical schools, residency programs and employment opportunities as practicing physicians and faculty members. While the strategies employed have had some measure of success, our best efforts to increase diversity in our specialty, and in medicine in general, are being undermined by our biases and our traditional methods for identifying talents.

Indexed as

Minority GroupsRadiologyBlack or African AmericanEthnicityHispanic or LatinoHumansUnited StatesAmplification cascadeDiversityRadiologyUnconscious bias

Identifiers

PMID35732842
PMCPMC9217720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.