No.

References Highlights Gap Findings

Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S.
(1985). Characterizing perceived risk. In R.
W. Kates, C. Hohenemser, & J. X.
Kasperson (Eds.), Perilous progress:
Managing the hazards of technology (pp.
1 91-125). Boulder, CO: Westview.
*It aims to discover what people mean what they say that
something is risky. To develop a psychological taxonomy or risk
that can be used to understand people’s perception and predict
societal response; and to develop methods for assessing public
opinion about risk in a way that is useful for informing policy
decisions.
*They reported on 3 psychometric scaling studies (Table 1). In
each study, participants rated a given set of hazards on a range * To determine perceived risk, participants were asked for each 30 hazards to consider the risk for
of risk characteristics and indicated the degree of risk reduction dying (across all U.S society), as a consequence of this activity or technology.
and regulation they desired. *They found psychometric scaling can quantify similarities and differences among groups with regard
Based on this data, they explored the relationships among risk to risk perception and attitudes
characteristics to people’s perception of risk and their desire for *Risk Adjusted
risk reduction and regulation. *Risk Regulation
*Risk characteristics questionnaire see Table 5

To lift the discussion out of the tourism domain and to show the The lack of precision and standardization is hindering For future research it is important that
relevance of generic psychometric risk research for tourism the comparisons of findings across studies as well as perceived risk is not conceptualized as the
scholars. They reviewed the psychometric literature, and only systematic accumulation of knowledge. The present sum of probability and severity of
used examples from tourism risk research in order to highlight paper gives some examples of how diverging consequences, nor should it be
the relevance of the generic findings. definitions of risk may constitute a serious problem. It conceptualized or measured as worry or
*Tourist risk perception is not different from risk perception, and also shows how measures of perceived risk are anxiety, nor as probability” in accordance
Wolff, K., Larsen, S., &Ogaard, T. (2019). therefore all findings from generic risk research are directly influenced by various heuristics and biases via item with the most wide-spread and accepted
How to Define and Measure Risk relevant for tourism risk research. Increased awareness of these wording. Lacking awareness of the effects of these definition of perceived risk in the generic
Perceptions. Annals of Tourism 79 findings will increase the accumulation of scientific knowledge biases may lead to erroneous conclusion regarding the psychometric and economic research
2 (102759) within tourism risk research. relative risk of various hazards. literature (Lowenstein et al., 2001)
Slovic, P. (2016). Do Adolescents Smokers Know the Risk? In P. Slovic (Ed.). The Perception of risk (pp.346-371).
3 Routledge. Risk is commonly understood as a cognitive evaluation of outcome probability and outcome
severity. It is however well known that people largely ignore probability and mainly rely on
Lowenstein, S., Weber, E., Hsee, C. & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267-286. outcome severity when judging risk.
4 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267.
Le, T., &Arcodia, C. (2018). Risk perceptions on cruise ships among young people: Concepts, approaches, and Another definition of perceived risk is as the sum of outcome severity and outcome
5 directions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 69, 102-112. https://doi.org/1016/j.ijhm.2017.09.016. probability instead of the product of these two factors.
Risk perceptions can be defined as an individual’s perceived Risk perceptions are central to behavior change theories such as the Health Action Process
Ferrer, R., & Klein, W. (2015). Risk perceptions susceptibility to a threat. It is a subjective judgment about the Approach or the Health Belief Model that aim to explain and change exercise behavior. In
and health behavior. Current Opinion in characteristics and/or severity of a certain risk. general, people tend to judge themselves as less vulnerable than others to health risks, such
6 Psychology, 5, 85-89. as population, drug addictions, diabetes, and cancer.
*”Communicating risk is a key public health strategy. The recent UK Government strategy Saving They assessed risk behavior, and knowledge and perception
Lives: Our Healthier Nation highlights the need for a new relationship between the government of voluntary and involuntary risks using an anonymous
Cook, P. &Bellis, M. (2001). Knowing the risk: and the public in relation to risk. “ CITED questionnaire completed by 472 students. Knowledge and
Relationships between Risk Behavior and Health *The implicit assumptions are the public intercepts risk information in a logical fashion and adopts perception were measured by the extent to which subjects
7 Knowledge. Public Health 115, 54-61. behavioral changes to reduce risk. agreed with statements of risk-related information.
 *Respondents were asked if they knew if they had received a
medical imaging test that uses IR, and if so, if they had been
counseled on the risks and benefits of the imaging study by the *MEDICAL SOURCES OF IR. Respondents who were knowledgeable about medical sources
RT. Using Likert-style scale, respondents ranked their of IR tended to have higher educational level and were more likely to work in science or
confidence in their healthcare professionals’ knowledge on healthcare. 80% of the respondents underestimated the contribution of medical imaging tests.
medical imaging tests. *RADON AS SOURCE OF IR. Men were more likely to select radon as being the greatest risk
*In order to compare perceived health risk of various sources of to average Vermonters
Evans, K., Bodmer, J., Edwards, B., Levins, J., O’ IR, respondents were asked to select the greatest and least risk: *NUCLEAR POWER AS SOURCE OF IR. Respondents with higher education level and males
Meara, A., Ruhotina, M., Smith, R., Delaney, T., medical imaging test that uses IR, radon, other natural sources were more likely to correctly select nuclear power as the least risk for the respondents.
Contois, R., Bocuzzo, L., Hales, H., & Carney, J. of IR, nuclear power plants, or airplane travel. *ROLE OF HC PROF. Respondents with higher education level and males were more likely to
(2015). An Exploratory Analysis of Public *Individuals who selected either 4 or 5 were considered to be correctly select nuclear power as the least risk for the respondents.
Awareness and Perception of Ionizing Radiation “confident” in their knowledge of IR, while those who selected 1 *Only 8% of the respondents from the general public in four Vermont countries expressed
and Guide to Public Health Practice in Vermont. or 2 were considered to be “poorly confident” having confidence in their knowledge of IR. Majority of the respondents prefer to received
Journal of Environmental and Public Health. *Respondents were asked to report where they received information from their HC professionals and given the continually increasing utilization of
Volume 2015, Article ID 476495. information about IR medical imaging tests using IR, educating current and future HC professionals would have a
8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/476495. profound and positive impact on public awareness of IR.
A common communication study is to compare the amount of Important techniques for effective patient
radiation from an imaging study with the radiation that people communication also include speaking in a
received from the ambient environment. Another strategy is to More and more patients are expressing a desire concise manner and giving the patient
make comparison with mortality risks from common activities, to be informed of these cancer risks (10). opportunities to make sure they understand
about which patients may have a better intuition about the risks. However, many providers have little the issues. Patient should be given
*However, a concomitant rise in CT imaging has resulted in understanding of carcinogenic risks of imaging opportunities to ask questions if they remain
greater population exposure to IR. IR-based imaging, primarily in examinations, or how to communicate those confused about a topic. It is also important
the form of CT and fluoroscopy, has been estimated to account risks (10). to translate medical terms into
for as much as 2% of all cancers in the U.S (15, 16). From a *Providers also wish to inform patients about understandable concepts and avoid medical
Shyu, J. &Sodickson, A. (2015). Communicating single CT with an effective dose of 10 millisieverts (mSv), the US these risks, but may not feel comfortable having jargon. If not everyone can be informed,
Radiation Risk to patients and referring physicians Food and Drug Administration estimates that a patient has a 1 in these discussions because they are unfamiliar then priority should be given to those who
in the emergency department setting. Br J Radiol 1000 chance of developing a cancer, and a 1 in 2000 chance of with the doses imparted by CT studies and how are vulnerable, including children, pregnant
9 2016; 89: 20150868. that cancer being fatal (17) they relate to cancer risk. and young patients.
Lam, D., Larson, D., Eisenberg, J., Forman, H., Lee, C. Communicating potential radiation-induced cancer risks from medical imaging directly to patients. AJR Am J
10 Roentgenol 2015; 205, 962-70. doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15057.
Ho. S., Tsuyoshi, O., Looi, J., Leong A., Chuah, A. (2019). Exploring *Understanding public perception is critical to developing policies for nuclear energy. This study conducted focus group discussions with the
public perceptions of benefits and risks, trust, and acceptance of nuclear Thai and Vietnamese public to understand their trust in potential stakeholders, benefit perception, risk perception, and acceptance of nuclear
energy in Thailand and Vietnam: A qualitative approach. Energy Policy. energy. The participants in both countries preferred economic benefits such as boosting national development to environmental benefits.
11 127, 259-268. *Scientists and the public often do not share similar views or values about scientific issues (Su et al., 2016)
Su, L., Cacciatore, M., Brossard, D., Corley, E., Scheufele, D., Xenos, M. (2016). Attitudinal gaps: how experts and lay audiences from policy attitudes toward
12 controversial science. Sci. Public Policy. 43:2, 192-206. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv031.
Little, M., Hall, P., Charles, M. (2007). Are cancer risks associated with exposures to ionizing Cancer risk is the largest component of radiation-induced detriment for a general population (CITED). The latest
radiation from internal emitters greater than those in the Japanese A-bomb survivors? Radiat versions of the cancer incidence (11, 12) and mortality (13-15) for the Japanese atomic bomb survivors LSS cohorts
13 Environ Biophys. 4, 299-310. Doi 10.1007/s00411-007-0122-3 were employed.
Freudenberg, L. & Beyer, T. (2019). *The attitudes of patients undergoing diagnostic imaging Laypersons see a high risk potential in nuclear energy Some patients perceived the risk of
Subjective Perception of Radiation Risk. J procedures that use IR vary widely. Patient perception of and regard this power source as unacceptable but radiation as so high that they forgo critical
Nuc Med, 52:29s-35s. radiation dose strongly influences their acceptance of diagnostic believed that x-rays have low risk and hence are diagnostic procedures.
14 doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.085720. examinations or therapies involving radioactivity. They reviewed acceptable. By contrast, experts describe both nuclear
 perceptions and medical experts. Several studies show that energy and x-rays as acceptable and assert that both There are distinct differences between
physicians are frequently poorly informed about radiation levels bear moderate risk. patients and specialists in their evaluation
associated with nuclear medicine and radiologic examinations. There is no uniform or consistent perception of and perception of ionizing radiation, both in
In addition, patients’ decisions against undergoing an imaging radiation risks (17.old) general and in a medical context. The
procedure are frequently based on partial and sometimes They used Implicit Association Test developed by perceptions of patient-as odd as it may
incorrect information. Greenwald et al. (23), an interesting approach in seem to experts-forms a strong basis for
*The increased frequency of radiology imaging examinations psychology. The test measures the strength of the decisions that patients make.
worldwide has triggered studies on the lifetime risk of cancer association between mental representations of objects
from external radiation exposure-studies that are discussed in memory. It is evident that not only patients but many
controversially (15, 18) The quantitative approach is guided by measurable physicians outside nuclear medicine and
*A recent report by the Medical Board of the Health Authorities objective observations that can be expressed via radiology are laypersons with regard to
in Zurich, Switzerland, referred to combined PET/CT as an formulas. Because the complexity of many situations these specialties. It must be a primary goal
“imaging examination with maximum radiation exposure and cannot be expressed numerically, a purely quantitative of radiologic and nuclear medical
potential harm” and thus “posing a certain risk to the patient of approach might not be applicable to daily life situations professionals to thoroughly and carefully
developing cancer from the examination” (19) and thus might lack practical relevance (26-28). The educate future opinion shapers.
They reflect on medical, sociologic, and cultural studies that qualitative approach aims at investigating and
investigate patient concerns and attitudes about IR. They understanding a research area using an open method. RECOMMENDATION: Radiation safety and
include data form standard literature search in PubMed, The qualitative is attractive for analyses in cultural the role of patient perception with regard to
JSTOR, and MUSE. They offer suggestions on how to address studies because in this discipline, observations are CT should be investigated in future studies.
the concerns of patients and propose corresponding actions based on realities that have already been interpreted We think that broadening the scope of
with regard to therapeutic decisions. (29). Here, their subjective assessments by the subjects investigators to include sociologic and
*Today, CT accounts for about 15% of radiology procedures under study strongly shape their notion of reality. The anthropologic aspects would be a fruitful
performed across all medical settings and contributes up to 75% qualitative approach offers several solid research approach.
of the medically administered radiation dose (20) and up to 40% approaches such as content analysis (30,31),
of the total radiation dose (4.old) argumentative and practical structure of opinions (26).
Brenner, D., Hall, E. (2007). Computed Tomography- an increase source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med, They estimated that 0.4% of all cancers in the US may
15 357:2277-84. Doi:10.1056/NEJMra072149. be attributed to CT.
16 American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures. (2014). Atlanta GA: American Cancer Society.
Radiation-emitting products what are the radiation risks from CT? Retrieved on October 22, 2019. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-
17 EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/Medical Imaging/MedicalX-rays/ucm115329.htm
Huang, B., Law, M., Khong, P. (2009). Whole-body PET/CT scanning: estimation of radiation dose and cancer risk.
18 Radiology, 251:166-174.
19
Soye, J., Paterson, A. (2008). A survey of awareness of radiation dose among health professionals in Northern Ireland.
20 Br J Radiol. 81:725-729.
Radiations are categorized as ionizing and nonionizing. Ionizing, like x- They recruited 200 participants through a non-probability convenience sampling technique.
Naqvi, S., Batool, s., Rizvi, S., Farhan, K. rays, possess sufficient energy to separate an electron from an atom or 58% knew what radiation was, while 42% did not. In terms of education, they found that
(2019). Awareness of hazards of x-ray molecule, producing free radicals in the process which are chemically uneducated people were more likely to be ignorant about the term radiation (59.61%) rather
imaging and perception regarding unstable and reactive (22). The emergence of x-ray imaging in the late than being aware of it (40.38%), and found to be significant (p-value= 0.003).
necessary safety measures to be taken 1800s has been one of the greatest discoveries in medicinal science 83% though that it was beneficial, while 7.5% participants said they do not know. The most
during x-ray imaging procedures among (23). The use of x-rays and many other ionizing radiations is increasing common benefit of x-ray radiation is diagnosis (78.5%).
patients in public sector tertiary hospitals of rapidly and extensively with the introduction of new radiation-oriented High percentage of the study population (42%) was unaware of the term ‘radiation’. Result
Karachi, Pakistan. Cureus. therapeutic practices (2-3). Due to the extensive use of x-ray imaging, revealed a poor level of knowledge regarding the procedure and the harmful effects of x-ray
21 Doi:10.7759/cureus.4756 its effects should be understood. 20% of medical x-rays ordered are not imaging altogether.
 beneficial and only add to the unnecessary exposure in patients, Local patients were ignorant to the hazards of x-rays, showing lack of awareness to the dose-
contributing to 100-250 cases of cancer each year in the region (24). dependent risks of having cancer, anemia, burns, cataract, and fertility problems.
Although x-ray doses for clinical purposes are relatively low, any A study in Nigeria reported a higher percentage of patients (86.7%) who did not know about
unnecessary imaging could possibly lead to several-health problems in the dangers of x-ray associated with imaging (8-9, 12) 25-26-27
the future (24). Awareness and knowledge among patients regarding Most of the people in their study were unable to identify the most susceptible population group
the effects of x-ray imaging, therefore, becomes important. to which x-rays are more harmful.
They conducted a cross-sectional study. Among the patients who were able to identify the risks associated with x-ray imaging, the
**Overall knowledge of the patients regarding radiation and its hazards primary source of information was television.
is unsatisfactory. Safety protocols are less implemented in these The difference in the source of information also suggests a low trend of seeking informed
hospitals, probably due to limited resources. consent from the patient by their doctors and briefing them about the imaging technique
WITH QUESTIONNAIRE conducted.
Electronic media is the primary source of information and may play a pivotal role in improving
the overall understanding of radiation risks among the masses.
Praveen, B. (2013). Radiation in dental practice: awareness, protection and recommendations. J Contemp Dent Pract. Ionizing, like x-rays, possess sufficient energy to separate an electron from an atom or
22 14:143-148 molecule, producing free radicals in the process which are chemically unstable and reactive
Szarmach, A., Piskunowicz, M., Swieton, D., Muc, A.mMockallo, G., Dzierzanowski, J., Szurowska, E. (2013). The use of x-rays and many other ionizing radiations is increasing rapidly and extensively with
23 Radiation safety awareness among medical staff. Pl J Radiol. 80:57-61. the introduction of new radiation-oriented therapeutic practices
Due to the extensive use of x-ray imaging, its effects should be understood. 20% of medical x-
rays ordered are not beneficial and only add to the unnecessary exposure in patients,
Yurt, A., Cavusoglu, B., Gunay, T. (2014). Evaluation of awareness on radiation protection and knowledge about contributing to 100-250 cases of cancer each year in the region (24). Although x-ray doses for
radiological examinations in healthcare professionals who use ionized radiation at work. Mo1 Imaging RadionuclTher. clinical purposes are relatively low, any unnecessary imaging could possibly lead to several-
24 23:48-53. health problems in the future (24).
Sin, H., Wong, C., Huang, B., Yiu, K., Wong, W., Chu, Y. (2013). Assessing local patient’s knowledge of radiation dose
and risks associated with medical imaging: a questionnaire study. J Med imaging RadiatOncol. 57:38-44.
25 Doi10.1111/j.1754-9485.2012.02471.x
Busey, J., Soine, L., Yager, J., Choi, e., Shuman, W. (2013). Patient knowledge and understanding of radiation from A study in Nigeria reported a higher percentage of patients (86.7%) who did not know about
26 diagnostic imaging. JAMA Intern Med. 173:239-241. Doi:10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.1013 the dangers of x-ray associated with imaging.
A survey was administered to patients, medical students, and referring physicians to determine
Conclusion: there is a need for educating the public, medical students, the knowledge of radiation exposure risk associated with commonly ordered medical imaging
and referring physicians about radiation exposure and associated risks tests.
so that patients receiving multiple medical imaging tests are aware of A total of 127 patients, 32 referring physicians, and 30 medical students completed the survey.
Ricketts, M., Baerlocher, M., Asch, M., the radiation they receive, and physicians and future physicians will 92% of the patients were not informed of the radiation risks associated with the test and have
Myers, A. (2013). Perception of radiation make informed decisions when ordering such tests to limit the amount false perceptions about the use of radiation and its associated risks. Physicians and medical
exposure and risk among patients, medical of radiation that patients receive and to promote informed consent students had misconceptions about the use of ionizing radiation in a number of radiologic
students, and referring physicians at a among patients. examinations. CT and barium studies were thought to be associated with the least ionizing
tertiary care community hospital. Canadian *Studies that investigated the perception of radiation risk are scarce. radiation among physicians.
Association of Radiologists Journal Physicians have the lowest level of concern when it comes to radiation Some physicians may believe that their patients would refuse pertinent diagnostic imaging
27 64:2018-212. risks. tests if they are informed of the associated risks.
Determining the differences in the perception of risks between experts They examined lay people’s (N-1020) and experts’ (N-332) perception of five different
who are regularly exposed to radiation, and lay people provides radiological risks: nuclear waste, medical x-rays, natural radiation, an accident at a nuclear
Perko, T. (2014). Radiation risk perception: important insights into how potential hazards may be effectively installation in general. The results showed that experts perceive radiological risks differently
A discrepancy between experts and the communicated to the public. from the general public. Experts’ perception of medical x-rays and natural radiation is
general population. Journal of Human behavior is primarily driven by perception and not by facts significantly higher than in general population, while for nuclear waste and an accident at a
28 Environmental Radioactivity. 133:85-91. (Renn, 2008) (29) nuclear installation, experts have lower risk perception than the general population.
 The main communication challenge is that the experts and the public
frequently disagree when it comes to risk assessment. Several studies
related to these differences demonstrated that experts have in general a
lower perception of risks than the general public (Slovic 1996)
*There study adds on the previous research and highlights the risk
communication challenges arising from the differences in risk
perception identified between the experts and the lay public.
29 Renn, O. (2008). Risk governance: coping with uncertainty in a complex world. Earthscan, London.
This study seeks to address the research gap by exploring public
perceptions in SEA countries, particularly, Singapore. Additionally, this
study contributes to literature by exploring an under-studied cultural
context, which differs substantially from North America, Europe, and
East Asia in terms of its culture, language, and religion (Vinayak et al.,
2014). (31)
*Theoretically, this study can contribute to public opinion research on
nuclear energy
by applying both the psychometric paradigm and the source credibility
theory in an under-studied cultural context.
Practically, the insights gleaned from this study can assist policymakers
and communication practitioners in formulating and implementing
effective communication strategies to raise public awareness about
nuclear energy.
*This study utilizes the source credibility theory
Ho, S., Looi, J., Chuah, A., Leong, A., to understand how laypeoples’ perceived expertise and trustworthiness
Pang, N. (2018). “I can live with nuclear of nuclear-related information sources and potential stakeholders
energy if…”: Exploring public perceptions of function as judgement heuristics. Therefore, this study aims to
nuclear understand the public's credibility perceptions of individuals and
energy in Singapore. Energy Policy, organizations, such as potential stakeholders of nuclear energy and
30 120:436-447. various media outlets.
Viklund, M.J., 2003. Trust and risk perception in western Europe: a cross-national study.
31 Risk Anal. 23 (4), 727–738. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00351
Pew Research Centre, 2015. Generations Defined. 〈http://www.pewresearch.org/facttank/2015/05/11/millennials-
32 surpass-gen-xers-as-the-largest-generation-in-u-slabor-force/ft_15-05-11_millennialsdefined/〉 (accessed 7 June 2017).
33
Yoshida, M., Honda, E., 2017. Influence of
radiation education on risk perception in It is known that laypeople and experts have different
Japanese dental students. Dent. Health judgment
34 Curr. Res. 3, 1–6. criteria for perceiving risk (Slovic et al., 1979; Slovic.,
Slovc, P., 1996. Perception of risk from 1996; Perko.,
35 radiation. Radiat. Protect. Dosim. 68, 165– 2014, Yoshida and Honda, 2017). 34
Results show that the general population has a higher risk perception that the experts only for
some radiological risk perception than the experts only for some radiological risks. The risks
from medical use of ionizing radiation are perceived much higher by the employees of the
nuclear research center than by the general population.
In-depth analysis results influenced by psychometric risk characteristics:
-the larger is the professional experience, the lower the risk perception
The feeling of being protected against risks from nuclear installations leads to lower perception
*This age classification was derived based on the general age of majority for contractual
capacity in Singapore1 (Yeo, 2015), and the definition of generations by the Pew Research
Center2 (Pew Research Centre, 2015) (32)
*The psychometric paradigm has informed policymakers and communication practitioners
about the factors influencing laypeople's risk perceptions toward nuclear energy (Siegrist,
2010).
*This study utilizes the psychometric paradigm to understand the public's risk and benefit
perceptions of nuclear energy in Singapore, while teasing out the intergenerational similarities
and differences.
*Congruent with Hovland et al.’s (1953) research, the findings also implied that participants’
trust in potential nuclear stakeholders were based on perceived source expertise and
trustworthiness.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
First, policymakers and communication practitioners can segment the public according to their
age groups and media consumption behaviors to formulate effective public communication
tactics and disseminate nuclear-related messages. Second, policymakers and communication
practitioners can clarify the misconceptions and reservations toward nuclear energy identified
in this study.Third, policymakers and communication practitioners can emphasize the key
benefits of nuclear energy in public communication campaigns to increase public exposure to
the benefits of nuclear energy.
Apart from these public education initiatives, policymakers can consider incorporating nuclear-
specific content in various phases of the formal education curriculum.
Considering the absence of nuclear power projects in Singapore, policymakers can also
consider collaborating with research institutes in countries with existing nuclear facilities to
nurture local nuclear experts.
 179.
Soentono, S. Nuclear power development
in Indonesia. http://waste.nuc.berkeley.edu/
asia/1997/97ILP_Soentono.pdf, Retrieved
on October 27, 2019
Best P., Skelding K., Mehran, R., et al. (2011). SCAI consensus document on occupational radiation exposure to the The use of medical imaging is rising, and approximately 3.3 billion of the 5 billion imaging
36 pregnant cardiologist and technical personnel. Catheter Cardiovascular Interv., 77(2):232-241. examinations performed worldwide use ionizing radiation.

International Atomic Agency. Radiation protection in diagnostic and interventional radiology:L17.2: Optimization of Specialties outside radiology such as urology, orthopedic surgery, surgery, gastroenterology,
protection in interventional radiology. https://rpop.iaea.org/RPOP/RPoP/Content/AdditionalResources/Training/1_ vascular surgery, and anesthesiology often use imaging examination involving ionizing
37 TrainingMaterial/Radiology.htm. Retrieved on October 27, 2019. radiation.

For DOST:

1. CT study
2. Knowledge of referring physicians, residents, and nurses in ionizing radiation