Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42008047›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2026

Equity, diversity, and inclusion: variations in clinical and academic radiology.

C Kassanje, E H Y Wong, J O Bamidele, A C Offiah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

C KassanjeUniversity of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK. ckassanje@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-4957-7940
E H Y WongUniversity of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-3326-478X
J O BamideleUniversity of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7748-5257
A C OffiahDivision of Clinical Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8991-5036

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are fundamental to achieving fairness and representation in radiological research and practice. This review aims to examine how structural inequities related to race, sex, gender, age, disability, and socioeconomic status shape imaging research, workforce composition, and clinical outcomes. Racial disparities persist through outdated diagnostic assumptions and unequal access to imaging, while the limited representation of minority clinicians in leadership continues to affect research priorities and inclusivity. Similarly, sex and gender inequities also remain, with women being underrepresented in academic and interventional radiology, and transgender and gender diverse individuals often excluded from research and clinical systems. These gaps highlight the importance of inclusive mentorship, equitable leadership opportunities and consistent use of inclusive terminology. Differences in age, disability, and socioeconomic status affect participation and outcomes in imaging research. Older adults, children and people with disabilities are often excluded from imaging datasets, reducing generalisability and limiting the safe application of new technologies such as artificial intelligence. Socioeconomic inequities affect access to timely imaging and distort normative datasets, leading to misinterpretation of results in deprived populations. Inclusive recruitment, adaptive imaging protocols, and explicit consideration of social context in research design are essential to address these disparities. To address this, radiology must prioritise inclusive recruitment, adapt imaging protocols for underrepresented groups, and integrate EDI principles into study design, dataset curation, and peer review. Embedding these practices will enhance scientific validity, ethical integrity, and patient-centred care, ensuring that imaging research truly reflects the diverse populations it serves. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This review highlights how addressing equity, diversity, and inclusion in radiological research and practice is essential for improving the relevance, accuracy, and fairness of imaging data and emerging technologies across diverse patient populations. KEY POINTS: Persistent gaps in diversity affect fairness within radiological research and clinical practice. Inequities hinder equitable representation and limit the generalisability of radiological findings. Inclusive practices better serve the diverse populations we care for.

Indexed as

DiversityEquityInclusionRadiological research

Identifiers

PMID42008047
PMCPMC13096468

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.