EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 54 / No 4 (October-December 2019) Radioprotection, 54 4 (2019) 295-301 References
Free Access
Issue
Radioprotection
Volume 54, Number 4, October-December 2019
Page(s) 295 - 301
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2019028
Published online 13 September 2019
  • American Society of Radiologic Technologists. 2017. ASRT Position Statements. Available from https://www.asrt.org/docs/default-source/governance/hodpositionstatements.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Avolio BJ, Bass BM. 1995. Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadersh. Q. 6(2): 199–218. [Google Scholar]
  • Avolio BJ, Bass BM. 2004. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Manual and Sampler Set. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden. [Google Scholar]
  • Berrington de González A, Darby S. 2004. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: Estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 363(9406): 345–351. [Google Scholar]
  • Bontrager KL, Lampignano JP. 2014. Bontrager’s Handbook of Radiographic Positioning and Techniques. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier. [Google Scholar]
  • Calman N, Kitson K, Hauser D. 2007. Using information technology to improve health quality and safety in community health centers. Progr. Community Health Partnersh. 1(1): 83–88. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chang I, Hwang H, Hung W, Li Y. 2007. Physicians’ acceptance of pharmacokinetics-based clinical decision support systems. Expert Syst. Appl. 33(2): 296–303. [Google Scholar]
  • Chau PYK, Hu PJ. 2001. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decis. Sci. 32(4): 699–719. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ciraj-Bjelac O, et al. 2011. Radiation protection of patients in diagnostic radiology: Status of practice in five Eastern-Europe countries, based on IAEA project. Eur. J. Radiol. 79: 70–73. [Google Scholar]
  • Deprez T, Schrijver L, Pauwels H, Bosmans H, Marchal G. 2001. Can patient positioning using an ultrashort fluoroscopic pulse be justified? In: IAEA, Radiological Protection of Patients in Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Radiotherapy, Vienna, Austria, March 26–30, 2001, pp. 89–92. [Google Scholar]
  • Dierckx D, Constales K, Gerardy N, Goegebuer T, Persyn K. 2005. Patient dosimetry measurement in 50 radiology departments in Belgium. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 117: 135–138. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gabel S. 2012. Power, leadership and transformation: The doctor’s potential for influence. Med. Educ. 46: 1152–1160. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Germonpré S, Gemmel P, Beeckman D, Trybou J. 2016. Determinants of using (non-)fluoroscopy-guided positioning for radiographs: A case study research. J. Radiol. Prot. 36(3): 667–679. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Haynes K, Curtis T. 2009. Fluoroscopic vs. Blind positioning: Comparing entrance skin exposure. Radiol. Technol. 81(1): 15–23. [Google Scholar]
  • International Atomic Energy Agency. 2015. Radiation protection in medicine. Setting the scene of the next decade . In: Proceedings of an International Conference, Bonn, 3–7 December 2012, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. Available from http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1663_web.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Jiang HJ, Lockee C, Bass K, Fraser I. 2008. Board engagement in quality: Findings of a survey of hospital and system leaders. J. Healthc. Manag. 53(2): 121–134. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kijsanayotin B, Pannarunothai S, Speedie SM. 2009. Factors influencing health information technology adoption in Thailand’s community health centers: Applying the UTAUT model. Int. J. Med. Inform. 78(6): 404–416. [Google Scholar]
  • Kroch E, et al. 2006. Hospital boards and quality dashboards. J. Patient Saf. 2(1): 10–19. [Google Scholar]
  • Liu L, Cruz AM, Rincon AR, Buttar V, Ranson Q, Goertzen D. 2014. What factor determine therapists’ acceptance of new technologies for rehabilitation – A study using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Disabil. Rehabil. 37(5): 447–455. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Nunnally JC. 1978. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  • Pynoo B, Devolder P, Duyck W, van Braak J, Sijnave B, Duyck P. 2012. Do hospital physicians’ attitude change during PACS implementation? A cross-sectional acceptance study. Int. J. Med. Inform. 81: 88–97. [Google Scholar]
  • Saunders M, Budden A, MacIver F, Teunis M, Warrenforward H. 2005. Dose implications of fluoroscopy-guided positioning (FGP) for lumbar spine examinations prior to acquiring plain film radiographs. Br. J. Radiol. 78: 130–134. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sheppard BH, Harwick J, Warshaw PR. 1988. The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendation for modifications and future research. J. Consum. Res. 15: 325–343. [Google Scholar]
  • Statkiewicz-Sherer MA, Visconti PJ, Ritenour ER, Haynes KW. 2014. Radiation Protection in Medical Radiography. Maryland Heights: Mosby, Elsevier. [Google Scholar]
  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3): 425–478. [Google Scholar]
  • Vrijens F, et al. 2012. Performance of the belgian health system. KCE Report 196C, 2012. Available from https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/page_documents/KCE_196C_Health_system_performance_0.pdf. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.