Phenomena of radiography science - A scoping review

Abstract

Introduction:The purpose of the study is to clarify the domain of radiography science. The main goal of science is building knowledge and developing ideas and theories that explain, predict, understand or interpret the phenomena investigated. Each discipline has its own perspective to view and study the phenomena of interest. The disciplinary perspective enables researchers in radiography science to reason and conceptualize phenomena, but it can also restrict them. The aim of this review was to investigate phenomena that are at the core of the discipline of radiography science. Methods: This study used a scoping review as the method. A systematic search was carried out in the databases: Science Direct, Pubmed, Cinahl, and Scopus. The selection of articles was conducted by predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria for the title, abstract and full text. After the exclusion process, fourteen articles were selected for a final review. The articles were analyzed with inductive content analysis. Results: From the articles, 117 research interests were identified; these were merged into 17 categories and further into six main categories. The main categories represent the phenomena radiography science investigates. The phenomena are: the radiographers' profession, clinical practices in diagnostic and therapeutic patient pathways, safe and high quality use of radiation, radiographic technology, discipline, management and leadership of radiography professionals Conclusions: Radiography science has a conceptual structure of its own that needs more investigation. Radiography science researches distinctive phenomena and specialized knowledge, common to researchers from different traditions and subspecialties thus justifying its existence. Implications for practice: Investigating the core phenomena of interest in radiography science can support researchers in the field to focus their research and to develop the concepts of radiography.

Identification of research priorities of radiography science: A modified Delphi study in Europe

“…Instead of an open first round, we used a scoping review as the starting point of our study. In an earlier study (Törnroos et al, 2021), we identified 117 research interests for radiography science. They formed the basis of the first‐round questionnaire.…”

“…Research priorities in radiography science identified F I G U R E 1 Description of the Delphi process. The two steps comprising the top row (scoping review) conducted prior to the current study have been reported in Törnroos et al (2021) 3 | RESULTS…”

A personal journey to build leadership skills through collaboration to support radiography research and evidence-based practice

“…The existence of two distinct research pillars, namely imaging technology and patient care, [1] and three areas (diagnostic, therapeutic and nuclear medicine) with many specialisations and variations globally (sonography, mammography, cross-sectional radiography etc.) make professional recognition even more challenging [4] . Even the professional title varies amongst countries, with Radiographer for the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS) or Techicien en Radiologie Medicale in Switzerland or Manipulateur d'electroradiologie medicale in France, Funding: This study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or notfor-profit sectors.…”

“…[3] Medical Imaging Technologist and Radiation Therapist in Australia, or Radiologic Technologist in United States of America making harder to be identify as a profession. Recognition requires to build up the necessary research capacity, to facilitate the continuous development of specific knowledge and the understanding of the associated clinical implications that, combined with clinical expertise, can lead to evidence-based practice ensuring the quality of the provided healthcare services [4][5][6] .…”

Radiography—An etymological and semantic concept analysis from the perspective of radiographic science

“…The concept of radiography is not straightforward nor easy to comprehend, and there are different interpretations depending on the scientific perspective [4,5]. The variety in interpretations can cause contradictions and lack of clarity depending on the scientific context, discipline and viewpoint.…”