MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410487341 · doi:10.1016/j.radi.2025.102982

Regulation of diagnostic radiography education and clinical practice: A comparative document analysis of Sub-Saharan Africa and international guidelines

2025· review· en· W4410487341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E Susiku, J. Hewitt‐Taylor, Theophilus N. Akudjedu

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiography · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommonwealth Scholarship Commission
KeywordsRadiographyMedicineMedical physicsClinical PracticeFamily medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This integrative document analysis examines statutory and regulatory scopes of practice and educational requirements that inform diagnostic radiographer registration in Sub-Saharan Africa, concisely comparing global standards. A methodical literature synthesis employed a modified Donabedian model and identified key themes concerning regulatory structures and processes influencing radiography education and practice. KEY FINDINGS: Seventy-six documents from Africa (n = 51, 67.1 %), Australia (n = 9, 11.8 %), North America (n = 8, 10.5 %) and Europe (n = 8, 10.5 %) were examined. Considerable global regulatory variability exists in the scope of practice regarding autonomy levels and practice areas for diagnostic radiographers. The depth and complexity of local training influence these variations. Some regulatory bodies (Namibia, South Africa, the UK and Canada) require pre-registration diagnostic radiographers to be proficient in projection radiography, CT and MRI, with stricter ultrasound and nuclear medicine restrictions. In contrast, other frameworks (Zambia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Rwanda, and Australia) allow a broader scope of practice. In the USA, regulations require single-modality training with additional educational requirements for multi-modality registration. The study further identified emerging attributes related to entry-level diagnostic radiographer competency profiles in regulatory documents. CONCLUSION: The identified variabilities highlight the need for reformation and standardisation in the international scope of practice policies. This reform should integrate emerging and threshold skills in competency profiles. These changes are crucial for adapting radiography education and practice to meet evolving healthcare demands. Additionally, this will enhance workforce mobility and improve the quality of patient care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regulatory bodies should champion current scope of practice reforms with key stakeholders to enhance global radiography workforce mobility and explore new regulatory models supporting graduates' transition into the workplace.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.396 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiographySame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207