Exploring the translational challenge for medical applications of ionising radiation and corresponding radiation protection research.

BACKGROUND: Medical applications of ionising radiation and associated radiation protection research often encounter long delays and inconsistent implementation when translated into clinical practice. A coordinated effort is needed to analyse the research needs for innovation transfer in radiation-based high-quality healthcare across Europe which can inform the development of an innovation transfer framework tailored for equitable implementation of radiation research at scale. METHODS: Between March and September 2021 a Delphi methodology was employed to gain consensus on key translational challenges from a range of professional stakeholders. A total of three Delphi rounds were conducted using a series of electronic surveys comprised of open-ended and closed-type questions. The surveys were disseminated via the EURAMED Rocc-n-Roll consortium network and prominent medical societies in the field. Approximately 350 professionals were invited to participate. Participants' level of agreement with each generated statement was captured using a 6-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as median ≥ 4 with ≥ 60% of responses in the upper tertile of the scale. Additionally, the stability of responses across rounds was assessed. RESULTS: In the first Delphi round a multidisciplinary panel of 20 generated 127 unique statements. The second and third Delphi rounds recruited a broader sample of 130 individuals to rate the extent to which they agreed with each statement as a key translational challenge. A total of 60 consensus statements resulted from the iterative Delphi process of which 55 demonstrated good stability. Ten statements were identified as high priority challenges with ≥ 80% of statement ratings either 'Agree' or 'Strongly Agree'. CONCLUSION: A lack of interoperability between systems, insufficient resources, unsatisfactory education and training, and the need for greater public awareness surrounding the benefits, risks, and applications of ionising radiation were identified as principal translational challenges. These findings will help to inform a tailored innovation transfer framework for medical radiation research.

Factors influencing the choice of radiology as a medical specialty in Ireland.

PURPOSE: To gain further insight into Irish medical students' and interns' specialty preferences and explore the various factors that influence choice of specialty with a focus on radiology. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted of medical students and interns enrolled at a single Irish institution. Survey topics included specialty preferences, associated influential factors, exposure to radiology to date, and respondents' interest in and understanding of radiology. RESULTS: Cardiology, emergency medicine, and paediatrics had the highest overall interest levels, with 27.0% (n = 133/492) of all participants declaring an interest in radiology. The most frequently selected reason for considering radiology as a specialty was the varied nature of the field. Men reported considering a career in radiology more often than women (x2 (1, n = 433) = 9.464, p = 0.002) and non-European respondents considered radiology less often than their Irish and European peers (x2 (1, n = 436) = 7.510, p = 0.006). While there was no significant association between exposure to radiology and interest in the specialty, participants with previous exposure to radiology were found to be more knowledgeable about the roles and responsibilities of a radiologist. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this study support previous research which concludes that medical students' choice of specialty is multifactorial. A strategic approach needs to be taken towards undergraduate radiology education which accounts for class composition, emphasises the diversity and impact of the field, and provides clinical exposure to the subject matter, as a tailored means of steering more students and interns towards the underserved discipline.