ReviewFrontiers in public health2024
Awareness and preparedness level of medical workers for radiation and nuclear emergency response.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning Prediction of Excess Relative Risk for Radiation-Induced Solid Thyroid Cancer Among Nuclear Medicine Healthcare Professionals: A Computational Modeling Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pilot Study on Risk Perception in Practices with Medical Cyclotrons in Radiopharmaceutical Centers in Latin American Countries: Diagnosis and Corrective Measures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Dose Reconstruction After a WD‒XRF Spectrometer Accident Using Minute-Rate TLD Measurements.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiological science and nuclear technology have made great strides in the twenty-first century, with wide-ranging applications in various fields, including energy, medicine, and industry. However, those developments have been accompanied by the inherent risks of exposure to nuclear radiation, which is a source of concern owing to its potentially adverse effects on human health and safety and which is of particular relevance to medical personnel who may be exposed to certain cancers associated with low-dose radiation in their working environment. While medical radiation workers have seen a decrease in their occupational exposure since the 1950s thanks to improved measures for radiation protection, a concerning lack of understanding and awareness persists among medical professionals regarding these potential hazards and the required safety precautions. This issue is further compounded by insufficient capabilities in emergency response. This highlights the urgent need to strengthen radiation safety education and training to ensure the well-being of medical staff who play a critical role in radiological and nuclear emergencies. This review examines the health hazards of nuclear radiation to healthcare workers and the awareness and willingness and education of healthcare workers on radiation protection, calling for improved training programs and emergency response skills to mitigate the risks of radiation exposure in the occupational environment, providing a catalyst for future enhancement of radiation safety protocols and fostering of a culture of safety in the medical community.
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.