EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 59 / No 3 (July - September) Radioprotection, 59 3 (2024) 173-183 References
Open Access
Issue
Radioprotection
Volume 59, Number 3, July - September
Page(s) 173 - 183
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2024004
Published online 18 September 2024
  • Arranz L. 2010. Utilización de la energía nuclear: la percepción del riesgo radiológico del público. experiencia desde el sector sanitario. Revista de Salud Ambiental 10: 53–56. [Google Scholar]
  • Baquerin MT, Scaricabarozzi R. 2013. Una aproximación al concepto de la percepción de riesgo: la participación de los medios de comunicación. Ecos de la Comunicación 6: 51–75. [Google Scholar]
  • Bayatiani MR, Farzanegan Z, Seif F. 2023. Evaluation of the knowledge and observance of radiation protection for pregnant radiology technologists and pregnant patients in radiology and CT scan departments of Arak. Radioprotection 58 (1): 31–36. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Bazyka D, Prysyazhnyuk A, Gudzenko N, Dyagil I, Belyi D, Chumak V, Buzunov V. 2018. Epidemiology of late health effects in Ukrainian Chornobyl cleanup workers. Health Phys. 115: 161–169. [Google Scholar]
  • Braun V, Clarke V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3: 77–101. [Google Scholar]
  • Collett G, Craenen K, Young W, Gilhooly M, Anderson RM. 2020. The psychological consequences of (perceived) ionizing radiation exposure: a review on its role in radiation-induced cognitive dysfunction. Int J Radiat Biol 96: 1104–1118. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • European Commission. 2000 Directorate General for the Environment 2000. Radiological Protection 118. Guide of indications for the correct request of diagnostic imaging tests. [Google Scholar]
  • European Comission, 2012 Radiation Protection no 162, Criteria for Acceptability of Medical Radiological equipment used in diagnostica radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy. Radiology. [Google Scholar]
  • Faggioni L, Paolicchi F, Bastiani L, Guido D, Caramella D. 2017. Awareness of radiation protection and dose levels of imaging procedures among medical students, radiography students, and radiology residents at an academic hospital: results of a comprehensive survey. Eur J Radiol 86: 135–142. [Google Scholar]
  • Ferdiana H. 2022. The impact of uncertainty communication on emotional arousal and participation intention: the psychophysiological effects of uncertainties on experts. J Risk Res 26: 39–47. [Google Scholar]
  • Garcés L, Giraldo C. 2013. El cuidado de sí y de los otros en Foucault, principio orientador para la construcción de una bioética del cuidado, Discusiones Filosóficas 22: 187–201. [Google Scholar]
  • Gil PR. 2012. Riesgos psicosociales en el trabajo y salud ocupacional, Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica 29: 237–241. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • GTC 45. 2012. Guía Técnica Colombiana. ICONTEC. [Google Scholar]
  • Hernández C, Durán A, Cortés MC. 2020. Lesiones oculares y radiación ionizante, Revista Colombiana de Cardiologia 27: 72–78. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hori A. 2020. Coming to terms with Fukushima disaster-related trauma and earlier trauma by constructing a new identity. About a case. Radioprotection 55 (4): 283–290. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Housni A, ES-Samssar O, Saoud B, El Amrani N, MalouM, Amazian K, Essahlaoui A, Labzour A. 2023. Radiation protection in the operating room: Need for training, qualification and accompaniment for the professionals. Radioprotection 58 (1): 37–42. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • IAEA. 2009. Justification of Medical Exposure in Diagnostic Imaging. Austria. [Google Scholar]
  • IAEA, WHO. 2012. Bonn Call For Action. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
  • IARC. 2000. Ionizing radiation, part 1: X- and Gamma (γ) radiation and neutrons. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum 75: 1–448. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 21. 1991. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publicación 103. 2007. Recomendaciones de la Comisión Internacional de Protección Radiológica. [Google Scholar]
  • Malone J, Zölzer F. 2016. Pragmatic ethical basis for radiation protection in diagnostic radiology. Br J Radiol 89:20150713. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mejía CR, Torres GS, Chacon JI, Morales L, Lopez CE, Taipe C, Verastegui A. 2019. Incidentes laborales en trabajadores de catorce ciudades del Perú: causas y posibles consecuencias, Revista de La Asociacion Espanola de Especialistas En Medicina Del Trabajo 28: 20–27. [Google Scholar]
  • Min Trabajo. 2014 Decreto 1477 por el cual se expide la tabla de enfermedades laborales. República de Colombia. [Google Scholar]
  • Min Trabajo. 2015. Decreto 1072 de 2015 por del cual se expide el Decreto Único Reglamentario del sector Trabajo. República de Colombia. [Google Scholar]
  • Navarrete Z. 2013. La universidad como espacio de Formación profesional y constructora de identidades, Universidades 63: 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  • NTC 5254. 2004. Gestión del Riesgo. ICONTEC. [Google Scholar]
  • Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education. 2017. The medical aspects of radiation incidents. Radiation Emergency Assistance Center/Training Site. [Google Scholar]
  • OEIA. 2016. Normas de seguridad del OIEA. IAEA [Google Scholar]
  • Poveda BJ, Plazas MC. 2020. Elements of radiation protection in intervention rooms. Revista Colombiana de Cardiología,27: 82–87. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Prades A, González F. 1999. La percepción social del riesgo: algo más que discrepancia expertos/público. Nucleus Panorama Nuclear 26: 3–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Prasarn ML. 2014. Commentary on: Intraoperative fluoroscopy, portable X-ray, and CT: Patient and operating room personnel radiation exposure in spinal surgery, Spine J 14:2992–2994. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Puerta JA, Morales J. 2020. Biological effects of ionising radiation. Revista Colombiana de Cardiologia 27: 61–71. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Raisio H, Puustinen A, Lindell J, Wiikinkoski T, Valtonen V. 2023. Could virtual volunteerism enhance information resilience in a nuclear emergency? The potential role of disaster knowledge workers and virtual emergent groups. Radioprotection 58 (1): 11–18. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Richardson DB, Cardis E, Daniels RD, Gillies M,O’Hagan JA, Hamra GB, Haylock R, Laurier D, Leuraud K, Moissonnier M, Schubauer MK, Thierry I, Kesminiene A. 2015. Risk of cancer from occupational exposure to ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study of workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS). BMJ 351: 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  • Riesgos Laborales. 2011. Sistema General de Riesgos Laborales. https://sistemas.fasecolda.com/rldatos/ [Google Scholar]
  • Rodríguez I, Martínez M, López Á. 2015. El riesgo percibido y la gestión de la seguridad. Revista de la Universidad industrial de Santander. Salud UIS 47: 23–32. [Google Scholar]
  • Rossignol N. 2015. Practices of incident reporting in a nuclear research center: a question of solidarity. Safety Science 80: 170–177. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sasaki MS, Tachibana A, Takeda S. 2014. Cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation: artificial neural networks inference from atomic bomb survivors. J Radiat Res 55: 391–406. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Scheer D, Benighaus C, Benighaus L, Renn O, Gold S, Röder B, Böl GF. 2014. The distinction between risk and hazard: understanding and use in stakeholder communication. Risk Anal 34: 1270–1285. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schieber C, Pölzl-Viol C, Cantone MC, Eleznik N, Economides S, Gschwind R, Abelshausen B, Savu D, Lafage S, Liutsko L, Charron S, Turcanu C, Geysmans R. 2020. Engaging health professionals and patients in the medical field: role of radiological protection culture and informed consent practices. Radioprotection 55: S235– S242. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Soffia P, Ubeda C, Miranda P, Rodríguez JL. 2017. Radioprotección al día en radiología diagnostica: Conclusiones de la conferencia iberoamericana de protección radiológica en medicina. Revista Chilena de Radiología 23: 15–19. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Troncoso C, Amaya A. 2017. Entrevista: guía práctica para la recolección de datos cualitativos en investigación de salud.Revista de la Facultad de Medicina 65: 329–332. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tsapaki V. 2020. Radiation dose optimization in diagnostic and interventional radiology: current issues and future perspectives. Phys Med 79: 16–21. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Zanca F, Collard C, Alexandre N, Deprez F, Salembier JP,Henry M, Rombaut E, Massart PE. 2020. Patient exposure data and operator dose in coronary interventional procedures: impact of body-mass index and procedure complexity. Phys Med 76: 38–43. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Zölzer F. 2020. Ethics of radiological protection-recent developments. J Public Health (Oxf) 42: 183–187. [PubMed] [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.