ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2024
Operational challenges and collaborative solutions in radiology image interpretation: perspectives from imaging departments in a low-resource setting.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Impact of inpatient volume on residents' In-training examination scores and burnout in Japanese community hospitals: a nationwide cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Large language models and large concept models in radiology: Present challenges, future directions, and critical perspectives.World journal of radiology · 2025Review
- AI-powered precision in dental radiographic analysis using tailored CNNs for tooth numbering and cavity detection.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Emerging Role of Multiparametric MRI in the Staging of Bladder Cancer: Insights From the BladderPath Trial.Cureus · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedical imaging's critical role in diagnosis requires prompt and precise image interpretation. Numerous radiology departments, especially in low-resourced settings, encounter challenges such as a shortage of radiologists in their operational setup. This study explored the perceptions of radiographers and radiologists from low-resourced departments in a single country regarding operational challenges and potential solutions in image interpretation.
methodsA qualitative approach was utilised, involving heads of departments, senior radiographers, and radiologists with a minimum of 5 years of experience, from three major state referral hospitals. Face-to-face, semi-structured interviews were conducted in November 2022, using an interview guide that included questions on the challenges encountered during image interpretation and the proposed solutions. Data analysis was conducted using Atlas.ti version 9.0, following the four-step content analysis method. All participants willingly provided consent to participate in the study.
resultsTen participants, comprising two radiologists and eight radiographers participated in the study. The research identified three main themes: image interpretation pathways, image interpretation operational challenges and proposed solutions for image interpretation. In addition, a total of 10 subthemes were generated from the three main themes.
conclusionThe study revealed critical challenges and the need to explore the formal inclusion of radiographers in image interpretation, as a way to improve efficiency. However, a comprehensive assessment of the image interpretation system, encompassing radiographers' knowledge and competence, is recommended for context-specific, empirical-based modifications to enhance service provision.
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.