ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2023
Digital radiography reject analysis: A comparison between two radiology departments in New Zealand.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiographic Projection Quality Score for the Knee (RPQS-Knee): Development and Reliability.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A nationwide survey of radiographic exposure factor selection practices in small animal veterinary clinics across Ireland.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Optimization of postoperative unicompartmental knee arthroplasty radiography using a phantom-based ray-summation positioning sheet.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Image Reject Patterns in Computed Radiography: Insights From a Ghanaian Radiology Department.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Positional Challenges of the Anteroposterior Pelvic X-Ray: Comparison of Imaging Reject Rates Between Trauma Trolley and Table Bucky.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Enhancing patient safety through radiograph rejection analysis: Insights from a diagnostic imaging department audit.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Multi-centre digital radiography reject analysis for different clinical room use types: The establishment of local reject reference levels for public hospital departments.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2024Article
- Making the most of X-ray reject analysis in the digital age.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionImage reject analysis (RA) in direct digital radiography (DDR) is an important quality indicator tool. Analysis of rejected images is a component of quality assurance (QA) programmes, with the overall aim of reducing patient radiation dose. This study aimed to compare differences in image rejection rates (RR) and the reasons for rejection between two radiology departments.
methodsA retrospective quantitative descriptive study of images performed across the two radiology departments (RAD 1 and RAD 2) acquired with DDR systems between the beginning of February and the end of May 2021 was undertaken. Collected data included the medical imaging technologist (MIT) selection of image rejection reasons for different anatomic regions and compared between the two radiology departments.
resultsA total of 47,046 images and 29,279 images were acquired at RAD 1 and RAD 2, respectively, with an overall image rejection rate of 7.86% at RAD 1 and 5.91% at RAD 2. The primary reason for image rejections was positioning errors, 79.4% and 77.3% recorded at RAD 1 and RAD 2, respectively. Significant differences were demonstrated between the two radiology departments for image rejection rates and selected reasons for rejection for most anatomical body groups.
conclusionThe implementation of image RA remains a key part of QA in radiology departments utilising DDR systems. This study recommends interventions based on image RRs for examinations taking into consideration the department-specific variations and imaging protocols used.
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.