Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40078773›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Assessment of radiation knowledge among medical personnel in nuclear emergency preparedness: a cross-sectional study.

Yanjun Xie, Xining Wang, Yuemin Lan, Xinyu Xu, Shaoteng Shi, Zhihao Yang, Hongqiu Li, Jing Han, Yulong Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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. Dose Reconstruction After a WD‒XRF Spectrometer Accident Using Minute-Rate TLD Measurements.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Yanjun Xie *The Second Afffliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Xining Wang *The Second Afffliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Yuemin Lan *The Second Afffliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Xinyu XuGlobal Health Institute, Health Science Center, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Shaoteng ShiGlobal Health Institute, Health Science Center, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Zhihao YangGlobal Health Institute, Health Science Center, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Hongqiu LiGlobal Health Institute, Health Science Center, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Jing HanGlobal Health Institute, Health Science Center, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Yulong LiuThe Second Afffliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Radiation literacy, encompassing the understanding of basic principles, applications, risks, and protective measures related to ionizing radiation, is critical for medical personnel working in jobs that involve the use of radioactive materials or medical imaging. In the context of nuclear emergency preparedness, the level of radiation knowledge among healthcare professionals-such as doctors, nurses, and radiographers-directly influences the effectiveness and safety of emergency responses. This study aims to address this gap by evaluating the radiation knowledge of medical personnel and identifying areas for improvement in profession-specific training programs. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a convenience sampling method. The study included 723 participants attending a medical emergency response exercise and clinical management workshop on radiation injury in Suzhou, China, in November 2023. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire, descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were performed to analyze participants' radiation knowledge and identify variations across different professional groups. Results: The majority of participants were female (64.73%), married (75.10%), and held an undergraduate degree (69.99%). Nurses (40.11%) and clinical doctors (30.29%) constituted the largest professional groups. Significant disparities in radiation knowledge were observed among healthcare workers. Nurses and management personnel demonstrated a stronger grasp of fundamental radiation concepts, such as radioactive nuclides and absorbed doses, compared to clinical doctors. For instance, 85.52% of nursing personnel and 72.34% of management personnel accurately identified the half-life of iodine-131, while only 49.32% of clinical doctors showed comparable knowledge. Furthermore, substantial differences in radiation emergency response capabilities were noted across professions. These findings emphasize the necessity for tailored, profession-specific training programs in radiation protection and emergency preparedness. Conclusion: The study reveals a generally insufficient understanding of basic radiation concepts and emergency response principles among medical personnel. Significant variations in radiation knowledge were observed across different professional groups, highlighting the need for specialized training modules. These modules should focus on fundamental radiation concepts, radiation exposure effects, and emergency response protocols, with content customized to address the unique needs of each professional group. By implementing such targeted training, the overall effectiveness and safety of nuclear emergency responses can be significantly enhanced.

Indexed as

Civil DefenseDisaster PlanningHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadioactive Hazard ReleaseSurveys and Questionnairesawarenessmedical personnelnuclear emergencypreparednessradiation knowledge

Identifiers

PMID40078773
PMCPMC11899641

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.