MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185336838

Evaluation of Personnel Radiation Monitoring in Radiodiagnostic Centres in South Eastern Nigeria

2010· article· en· W2185336838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jerome Njoku

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)MedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Data collectionRadiation monitoringMedical emergencyBusinessEnvironmental healthGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assess the level of personnel radiation monitoring in radio-diagnostic centres in South Eastern Nigeria. A cross sectional prospective survey that targeted radiographers working in ten selected government- owned hospitals in South Eastern Nigeria was conducted. The data collection instrument was a sixteen-item semi-structured self-completion questionnaire. Personnel radiation monitoring was available in only 4 out of 10 hospitals (40%) and in two of the hospitals radiation monitoring does not cover all the radiographers on employment. Radiation monitors were found to be read fairly regularly at about every quarter of the year but it takes more than 3 years for fresh supplies of radiation monitoring devices to be made in the hospitals where radiation monitoring is carried out. Radiation protection advisers or supervisors were available in only 4 hospitals (40%). Majority of the radiographers (41.5%; n = 17) believe the hospital management do not make provision for it in their budget. Dosimetric records of staff are not given any consideration during recruitment of new staff. Personnel radiation monitoring in South Eastern Nigeria is abysmally poor. This is a significant precautionary lapse as radiations risks cannot be assessed and corrective measures taken.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207