Multidisciplinary Development of Mobile Radiography Guidelines Reduced the Number of Inappropriate Mobile Exams in Patients Receiving Chest Radiographs in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To decrease the number of mobile chest radiograph requests for inpatients in British Columbia who are medically able to tolerate transport to the main department by introducing and implementing request criteria. METHOD: Concerns regarding inappropriate mobile exam requests in patients receiving chest radiography were surveyed at 28 medical imaging sites. In response, a multidisciplinary team composed a set of mobile radiography request guidelines incorporating feedback from all sites. These were successfully implemented along with in-person education to 21 sites. The number of adult annual mobile chest radiographs was tracked from 2014 to 2018, and informal feedback was obtained from participating sites. RESULTS: The percentage of mobile chest radiographs of all chest radiographs performed between 2014 and 2018 decreased by 3.2%, while the total number of all chest radiographs performed during this time, including both departmental and mobile, increased by 1.9%. Sites reported positive engagement with the initiative and expressed need for ongoing education to optimize its effect. CONCLUSION: Implementation of request guidelines with in-person education helped to reduce inappropriate mobile exams in patients receiving chest radiographs in British Columbia between 2014 and 2018. These guidelines promote patient safety through reduced radiation exposure, empower radiographers to mitigate inappropriate requests, and help to optimize use of limited hospital resources by reducing inappropriate mobile exams where routine departmental exams are more suitable.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".