ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2025
Ensuring the Safety of MRI Patients With Medical Implants or Devices In Situ: A Snapshot in Time of the Role and Responsibilities of New Zealand and Australian MRI Technologists (Radiographers).
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pre-Procedural Safety Screening in Diagnostic Imaging Across England: A Freedom of Information Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPoor clinical decision-making in MRI can lead to significant patient injuries and, in some cases, prove fatal. With the ever-increasing range and numbers of MR-conditional implants and devices, the complexity of decision-making in this environment has increased. While historically performed by radiologists, this decision-making is becoming integrated into the MRI technologists' (radiographers') role. The aim of this paper is to document the evolving role and responsibilities of MRI technologists (MRITs) in New Zealand (NZ) and Australia when scanning patients with medical implants.
methodsUtilising a mixed-methods case study research design, quantitative and qualitative data were collected via an online questionnaire and semistructured interviews. The questionnaire was completed by 235 MRITs, 12 of whom were also interviewed.
resultsFindings confirm that the MRIT role in NZ and Australia in 2018 had evolved over the preceding decade from one focused on technical proficiency to a role involving a higher level of cognitive function and competency relating to MRI safety. Participants identified that all MRITs must be responsible for MRI safety clinical decision-making, not just a select few. Some concerns were raised that radiologists are no longer sufficiently educated in MRI safety, supporting the need for a team effort instead.
conclusionAligning with recent global calls to standardise MRIT education and regulation requirements, this study provides evidence to support a separate registerable MRI scope of practice. This will enable MRI-specific knowledge and continuing professional development (CPD) in MRI safety to be mandated and audited so that clinical decisions are informed and safe.
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.