ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Exploring Patient Preferences for Information About CT Radiation Exposure: Bridging the Gap Between Patient Preference and Physician Practice.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sociodemographic factors associated with public awareness of medical radiation risks and safety practices in the West Bank, Palestine: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Radiation cognition, government trust and their potential influencing factors in residents within 30 km of Qinshan nuclear power plant.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: CT scan utilizes ionizing radiation poses a danger to the patient's health. Thus, telling the patient about ionizing radiation would be critical in promoting shared decision-making and improving patient-doctor communication. However, few studies have examined this topic broadly. Objective: The study was conducted to identify the frequency of physicians informing patients about the radiation risk before ordering a CT scan, as well as to examine the association between patients' demographic characteristics and their awareness of the radiation risks associated with CT scans. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 387 patients who had undergone CT scans at a tertiary hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected via phone interviews using a structured questionnaire. Chi-squared tests were employed to assess associations between patients' demographic characteristics and their awareness of CT scan radiation risks. Results: When examining knowledge, 58% of patients knew that CT involves harmful radiation. This knowledge was significantly associated with higher education level and previous experience with CT scans. Regarding doctors' practice of providing information to patients about the scan, 344 (88.9%) patients indicated that their doctor had explained to them why they needed the scan. Only 28 (7.2%) patients stated that their doctor had mentioned the amount of radiation, and 74 (19.1%) patients indicated that doctors mentioned the risks associated with the radiation of the scan. Almost all patients (96.9%) preferred to be told about why they needed a CT scan. Conclusion: The vast majority of patients who underwent CT scans did not receive enough information about the harm of the scans. However, most of them preferred to know about this harm.
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.