ABSTRACT
Scholarship flourishes in inclusive environments where open deliberations and generative feedback expand both individual and collective thinking. Many researchers, however, have limited access to such settings, and most conventional academic conferences fall short of promises to provide them. We have written this Field Report to share our methods for cultivating a vibrant intellectual community within the Science and Technology Studies Food and Agriculture Network (STSFAN). This is paired with insights from 21 network members on aspects that have allowed STSFAN to thrive, even amid a global pandemic. Our hope is that these insights will encourage others to cultivate their own intellectual communities, where they too can receive the support they need to deepen their scholarship and strengthen their intellectual relationships.
ABSTRACT
Interdisciplinary research needs innovation. As an action-oriented intervention, this Manifesto begins from the authors' experiences as social scientists working within interdisciplinary science and technology collaborations in agriculture and food. We draw from these experiences to: 1) explain what social scientists contribute to interdisciplinary agri-food tech collaborations; (2) describe barriers to substantive and meaningful collaboration; and (3) propose ways to overcome these barriers. We encourage funding bodies to develop mechanisms that ensure funded projects respect the integrity of social science expertise and incorporate its insights. We also call for the integration of social scientific questions and methods in interdisciplinary projects from the outset, and for a genuine curiosity on the part of STEM and social science researchers alike about the knowledge and skills each of us has to offer. We contend that cultivating such integration and curiosity within interdisciplinary collaborations will make them more enriching for all researchers involved, and more likely to generate socially beneficial outcomes.
ABSTRACT
The original version of this article, published on 02 May 2020, unfortunately contained a mistake.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To establish national reference levels (RLs) in interventional procedures under CT guidance as required by the 2013/59/Euratom European Directive. METHODS: Seventeen categories of interventional procedures in thoracic, abdominopelvic, and osteoarticular specialties (percutaneous infiltration, vertebroplasty, biopsy, drainage, tumor destruction) were analyzed. Total dose length product (DLP), number of helical acquisitions (NH), and total DLP for helical, sequential, or fluoroscopic acquisitions were recorded for 10 to 20 patients per procedure at each center. RLs were calculated as the 3rd quartiles of the distributions and target values for optimization process (TVOs) as the median. RLs and TVOs were compared with previously published studies. RESULTS: Results on 5001 procedures from 49 centers confirmed the great variability in patient dose for the same category of procedures. RLs were proposed for the DLPs and NHs in the seventeen categories. RLs in terms of DLP and NH were 375 mGy.cm and 2 NH for spinal or peri-spinal infiltration, 1630 mGy.cm and 3 NH for vertebroplasty, 845 mGy.cm and 4 NH for biopsy, 1950 mGy.cm and 8 NH for destruction of tumors, and 1090 mGy.cm and 5 NH for drainage. DLP and NH increased with the complexity of procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This study was the first nationwide multicentric survey to propose RLs for interventional procedures under CT guidance. Heterogeneity of practice in centers were found with different levels of patient doses for the same procedure. The proposed RLs will allow imaging departments to benchmark their practice with others and optimize their protocols. KEY POINTS: ⢠National reference levels are proposed for 17 categories of interventional procedures under CT guidance. ⢠Reference levels are useful for benchmarking practices and optimizing protocols. ⢠Reference levels are proposed for dose length product and the number of helical acquisitions.