ArticleCureus2026
Radiation Protection Practices Among Medical Students at Two United Kingdom Medical Schools.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 Orthopaedic surgery frequently involves the use of intraoperative fluoroscopy, exposing operating theatre personnel to ionising radiation. Medical students often attend orthopaedic procedures during their clinical training, yet their education on radiation safety and access to appropriate protective equipment remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate radiation safety among medical students during surgical placements, focusing on educational exposure, practical radiation protection practices, and perceived safety. Methodology A multicentre, cross-sectional, questionnaire study was conducted mainly among UK medical students from two medical schools in clinical years (n = 70). A structured nine-item questionnaire was distributed via Google Forms over a 10-day period in December 2023. Participants were recruited through university WhatsApp groups. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and completion of the questionnaire was taken as implied informed consent. Results A total of 70 medical students completed the survey (44% female, 30% male, 26% preferred not to say). Only 50% reported wearing an appropriately fitting lead apron, while 41% reported inadequate fit. Consistent use of a thyroid shield was reported by 41% of respondents, whereas 49% reported not wearing one. Formal radiation safety teaching before orthopaedic theatre attendance had been received by only 16% of participants. One-third (33%) reported feeling unsafe in operating theatres where ionising radiation was used. Conclusions The medical students surveyed who attended the theatre where ionising radiation was used demonstrated important gaps in radiation safety education and inconsistent use of appropriate protective equipment. Introducing structured radiation safety teaching before theatre exposure and ensuring access to correctly fitted protective equipment may improve student safety, confidence, and preparedness in the operating theatre.
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.