Reduction of Adult Fingers Visualized on Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) Chest Radiographs after Radiation Technologist and PICU Staff Radiation Safety Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A recent publication from our centre revealed a disturbing finding of a significant incidence of adult fingers seen on the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) chest radiographs. This is inappropriate occupational exposure to diagnostic radiation. We hypothesized that the incidence of adult fingers on PICU chest radiographs would decline after radiation safety educational seminars were given to the medical radiation technologists and PICU staff. METHODS: The present study's objectives were addressed by using a pretest-posttest design. Two cross-sectional PICU chest radiograph samples, taken before and after the administration of radiation safety education for our medical radiation technologists and PICU staff, were compared by using a chi2 test. RESULTS: There was a 61.2% and 76.9% reduction in extraneous adult fingers, directly exposed to the x-ray beam and those seen in the coned regions of the film, respectively, on PICU chest radiographs (66.7% reduction overall). This reduction was statistically significant (chi2 = 20.613, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Limiting unnecessary occupational radiation exposure is a critical issue in radiology. There was a statistically and clinically significant association between radiation safety education and the decreased number of adult fingers seen on PICU chest radiographs. This study provides preliminary evidence in favour of the benefit of radiation safety seminars.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".