Radiation safety education reduces the incidence of adult fingers on neonatal chest radiographs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A previous audit revealed a high frequency of adult fingers visualised on neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) chest radiographs-representing an example of inappropriate occupational radiation exposure. Radiation safety education was provided to staff and we hypothesised that the education would reduce the frequency of adult fingers visualised on NICU chest radiographs. Two cross-sectional samples taken before and after the administration of the education were compared. We examined fingers visualised directly in the beam, fingers in the direct beam but eliminated by technologists editing the image, and fingers under the cones of the portable x-ray machine. There was a 46.2% reduction in fingers directly in the beam, 50.0% reduction in fingers directly in the beam but cropped out, and 68.4% reduction in fingers in the coned area. There was a 57.1% overall reduction in adult fingers visualised, which was statistically significant (Z value - 7.48, P < 0.0001). This study supports radiation safety education in minimising inappropriate occupational radiation exposure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".